Thanks Kurt!
RAID setups are great both for speed and data integrity, but they do
have some drawbacks. They aren't cheap and I found that the heat that 5
drives put off has to be dealt with...meaning fans. Which brings me to
my biggest worry with servers...hardware failure. More and more I'm
liking the concept of cloud servers. Let someone else hassle with the
hardware!
Mike
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [NF] Intel i5 vs. Xeon CPU for a data server
From: Kurt Wendt <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: 6/18/2013 2:12 PM
I agree w/Ted! For me - powerful CPU is SUPER Useful - since I do 3D
graphics and now slicing of 3D files for rapid prototyping. But, for server
stuff - I always figured through put of data - like Fast HD's, and internet
connection is better bang for Buck. I never personally did RAID Arrays -
but, that's supposed be another big deal for Data Servers - which Ted didn't
touch on. And, I am in NO WAY an expert on HW (although - I personally built
my last 3 or 4 Workstations) - nor an expert on RAID (never implemented it
myself). I have just heard that if you do RAID (at least the one kind) - the
data can literally be pulled off TWO Drives at the SAME time - which should
give a Significant boost to data serving applications!
And - yeah - always throw as much RAM at the system that you can...
Happy Computing!
-K-
-----Original Message-----
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ted
Roche
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:02 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [NF] Intel i5 vs. Xeon CPU for a data server
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Mike Copeland <[email protected]> wrote:
Any opinions, facts as to whether a Xeon CPU would SIGNIFICANTLY,
NOTICEABLY outperform an Intel Core i5 on a box that is a CentOS running
MariaDB dedicated data server? I'm sure the Xeon would run cooler, fewer
cycles, etc.
Requisite consultant answer: It depends.
There are pretty much three potential bottlenecks on a database server:
bandwidth going in and out of the box (if you're moving big batches of
data, or have slow internet speeds), speed of moving data on and off the
disks -- are you using a fast disk array? -- and processing power to turn
the packets into SQL into data requests into disk I/O. Something is always
the bottleneck, and if it keeps up with customer demand, there's no need to
worry about it.
I've been using a Core i5 in this configuration for a year or so and while
watching the % of "busy" on the server, it rarely exceeds 5% on any core,
any parameter.
So, you do have data! This doesn't sound like a computing-intensive
application, then. If the CPU isn't even breaking sweat under this
(similar, right?) load, there's no need to bring in more horsepower.
imnsho, of course.
Do you have memory usage data? IME, throwing more RAM at big data servers
is usually the least expensive, highest return investment. Remember,
retrieving data from RAM is THOUSANDS of times faster than reading it off
fast disk arrays.
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
