Jim Green put forth on 2/19/2011 6:33 PM: > 2T drive is not that more expensive than 1T drive also, I use mysql
In fact it's right at double when you compare apples to apples. HDS has the lowest cost 7.2k 1TB and 2TB drives at Newegg. The 2TB model is slightly more than double the price. The system I spec'd out has $110 worth of 1TB drives. 2TB drives would be $240, adding $130 to the total system cost. My target was a system under $400 total with good quality and performance, an adequate amount of storage, storage redundancy, and including the GbE switch and cables. The goal being a totally manageable alternative to low performance low cost canned NAS products. Others read this list and might appreciate this information as well, so I was responding with something I thought might appeal to a wider audience as well. Ease of use was not a consideration, obviously. Those who need the ease of use of a canned NAS box aren't building DIY systems. > database to store relatively high frequency price data and other data. > Initially I plan to buy the WD green drives:( I guess the performance > hit is for all >2T drives? Only those drives using "advanced format" take the big performance hit using default partitioner configuration. The most notorious offender being the WD Green series, simply because it has had the largest sales due to its low price. I hope for your sake you change your mind as the headaches involved with the WD Green drives go beyond the sector alignment issue and outweigh the price advantage by a wide margin. Go with an HDS, Seagate, WD Blue or Black series, anything but WD Green and anything but advanced format. You should prefer a 7.2k rpm drive with native 512 byte sectors, which is exactly what I recommended with the HDS drives. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Linux+WD20EARS "Advanced Format" means the drive has 4096 byte physical sectors but it lies to the host OS saying the sectors are 512 bytes. This causes significant performance problems as the various Linux distros and their disk partitioners/etc don't cope properly with this kind of sector translation being performed by the drive firmware. Thus manual intervention is required during partitioning to get proper performance, and you have to know what you're doing in gparted or fdisk. > This is nice and affordable but it doesn't provide much computing > power for me do backtest the price data... I am considering building a > desktop with i7-2600k core(need to wait till the motherboard for it is > fixed). This build is intended as an inexpensive good performance NFS/CIFS NAS server, not an interactive desktop PC. It is meant to solve the external disk problem you stated in lieu of a low quality canned NAS product or multiple USB disks with mdraid. You can easily change the configuration to: 4 or 8GB RAM dual or quad core CPU 4 x 2TB HDDs instead of 2 x 1TB, but with a PATA CD/DVD drive Bumping up to 4GB ram and a dual core 3.2 GHz Athlon II is only an extra $35. If you think you need a quad core CPU, you're simply wasting money and idle cycles, along with everyone else on the quad/six core bandwagon... I'm partial to AMD platforms because they give much better performance per dollar in the real world. It appears you're partial to Intel. Feel free to substitute Intel platform parts for this build. You'll simply see the price tag increase with little or no increase in real world performance. Just stay away from the WD Green drives, or any 512/4096 hybrid drives, for your sake. :) -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d609082.3010...@hardwarefreak.com
