On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 06:11:45PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 05:34, csj wrote: > > On Mon, 6 May 2002 12:08:06 -0500 > > Michael Kahle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I am agreeing that I could scale it all back, but why? The ton of RAM > > > and dual procs is also because for the Windoz apps I still need, I am > > > going to be running VMWare, if you've every ran it, it is a HOG! But > > > like I said, I am well aware how much overkill this is, but I have the > > > money and never had a computer that would be my dream machine this is > > > kind of like the geeks midlife crisis, only I'm 27. :) > > > > If I had your money, and no hungry mouths to feed, I would build three > > machines. Why splurge all your money on a single high-powered machine? > > Suppose it got hit by lightning? I noticed you didn't put a UPS / surge > > protector in your list! If you insist on your dream machine, better buy > > a UPS that comes with a property-damage guarantee. > > With all those _noisy_ 10K disks, and the fans needed to cool > them, plus the fans to cool the 2 Athlons, I think I'd make > 2 machines: > > Box 1 has the SCSI disks, and, oh, say, 512MB RAM. All it needs > is a cheap, _old_ video card. Put it on the other side of the > house. > > Box 2 has the 2.5GB RAM, big screen, etc. > > You'd only get Fast Ethernet speeds, but your executables will > be on Box 2, and with 2.5GB RAM, you'll have a huge cache to > work with...
Yes, that's what I would do too: a workstation and a compile/testing/development machine. Plus allows you to have a good backup situation: box to box backups. Matthew -- Matthew Sackman Nottingham England BOFH Excuse Board: Operators killed when huge stack of backup tapes fell over. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
