I'm currently in the process of ordering a new server and would like to throw another $50-$70 at the default SATA II 7k 250 GB to increase performance. The server will host a site similar to WHT (php, mysql, and some forum traffic ).
There are three options I can get for the price:
1. Add another SATA II 7k 250 GB and set up RAID 1
2. Add a 73GB 15k RPM SA-SCSI and put mySQL on it. No RAID.
3. Toss out the SATA II 7k and take two SATA 10k 150 GB instead. Put mySQL on one of them. No RAID.
Please keep in mind that the question is budget-related (I know I can get more if I spend an extra $200 but that's not what I want ). Which of the above will make me happiest?
about the hd,there are two options, the first one is four 7200rpm sata to do raid 10, the second one is two 10000rpm sata to do raid 1, about the performance, which one will be better?
I have a delicated server with "Intel RAID Controller: Intel(R) 82801ER SATA RAID Controller",I cannot find information on this raid.The 80 GB harddisk is about 4 years old,if one harddisk fail,I wonder if I can swap a new one bigger capacity and it will auto rebuilt?
I'm running into a problem with a relatively new (2 months old) server. I have just a few accounts on it, and I'm already noticing unusual loads, for the... load. After some benchmarking with bonnie++ (and plain old "dd") there is clearly a problem.
Isn't a write-speed over 7MB/s reasonable to expect? Also look at the low CPU times...
Anyway running the same test on a similar but older AND busier server showed much better results than this. In fact dd'ing a 1GB file from /dev/zero "finished" in about 10 seconds but then pegged the server at 99% iowait (wa) for a full three minutes (until done being written from cache I assume), bringing load to 15.00
That's all the info I have so far... the data center just replaced the card (which gave no errors) with no effect. Running these benchmark tests is about the extend of my hardware experience.
Planning to buy a server from softlayer, adding a single 300gb 15k scsi drive costs 100$/month and adding 4 250gb sata drives with raid-10 costs 90$/month
I've recently put together a server in a hurry and overlooked an important aspect - data integrity after power loss. I'm using Linux software RAID-1 with two 150GB WD Raptors but I'm worried that data could be lost due to having write-back cache enabled without a battery backup unit. I would rather not disable the write-back cache for performance reasons.
What is the cheapest way to get a battery backup solution for Linux software RAID? Do I have to use a hardware RAID card or do standalone battery backup units exist that can use existing motherboard SATA ports?
I have ordered a dedicated server SATA Xeon but got IDE Xeon. Should I contact my datacenter to change the server or is ide and sata the same thing and it does not make a real difference.
I currently have a Dell Poweredge 2650 from a few years back, it is running...
2x Xeon 2.4ghz 512K 3GB DDR266 RAM 1x73GB SCSI
Back in the day this system cost $2000, now it's not worth close to that.
So my plans were to dump this bad boy as an SQL server, seeing it has the SCSI backplane and 3GB of RAM, and SQL usually doesn't need as much CPU as a web server.
Now my question, would it be better to use this server or would it be better to build a cheap Core 2 Duo with a RAID0 array with a few SATA drives?
Before you start going off on RAID0, it doesn't matter to me because I am using clustering/failover so data will not be lost and no downtime will be received if the array fails.
Basically what I want to know, is it worth it to keep this server and build upon it or would it be better to sell this server and look into spending an extra few hundred to build a new system with SATA RAID.
I'm going by price/performance rather than reliability as I am using failover to let you know once again .
To work on an HP ProLiant DL360/380. All I know is they are SCSI U320 drive bays, or that is the type of drive they take. Can anyone provide any insight on what may work? We are trying to get a more cost effective way to get more storage into a server. The largest SCSI drive I can find is 300GB for $200. You can get 2TB drives for that much these days.
I've got a 'virgin' machine from Nocster running CentOS 5, including a SATA drive (shows up as "SCSI").
It looks like it'll be a straight-forward install [url], but I wondered if anyone has had this exact combination before and if there are any problems I should expect? Given that it's a dedicated machine I don't have physical access to, I'm slightly paranoid about screwing up.
is it really worth the money nowadays to put in SCSI or SAS instead of SATAII (single disk, non-raid here), IF reliability is the only concern (i.e. NOT i/o performance) during the usual 3 year life time of a server?
Actually, I was pretty amazed by the sata reliability, in the past 3 years the only hdd failure was two sata on a mismatched mobo, which didn't support SATAII (a lot of read/write error, eventually died). Although we have 0% scsi and sas failure.
ok I installed with using application disk manager 10, but when turned on pc I not see the initial dos screen;
I see directly win xp; (one other pc I have a first step where see for 1 second the dos and where I can, if I want, enter in the bios); in this new pc I not see this step, so I not know how enter in the bios;
I clicked F10 etc other buttons but not work;
at the moment , after I does some error with acronis for make a dual bootI have this error: pc not turn on more win xp but have always error mbr; if I insert a boot floppy I can see the prompt C: but if I write dir I not see noone files I have only the dimension of the disk; if I write format c: not work;
QUESTION: how I can format all and reinstall better the sata disk?
and after, the steps for install on a 2nd partition one linux S.O.
I have an old server with only IDE and SCSI connectors on the mobo.
However, I have only SATA drives and no IDE available. I consider to buy an entry level PCI SATA adapter card. What do you think ? Can I install and boot Linux directly from it?
We have had some old dell 745n that had sata drives in them in the past. These are the only time we have ever used sata. The performance was terrible and we replaced the sata drives more times in over several years and we ever have with sas/scsi drives.
We are looking to get some new disk backup boxes which we plan to go 600gb sas drives, but might be considering 1tb nearline sata from dell.
I would like to hear from anyone using nearline sata and get feedback on performance and reliability overall. Also if you are using for backups, how many backup jobs are you able to run at the same time before performance drops?
How much faster is a Raptor 74GB 10,000rpm compared to a Seagate 250GB SATA-II 7200rpm? Both are priced the same. I'm comtemplating on which one to use for a database..go for more storage or a faster drive.
