Performance 4.x vs. 6.x

[NOC Meganet]

On Saturday 14 October 2006 15:05, Mike Horwath wrote:
> > I would say this preference is mostly set by beeing afraid of
> > migration (lots of things can come up when migrating a production
> > server) or by lack of money to buy some nasty HW ...
>
> Ah, hardware bigotry.  Your colors are showing.
>

come on, it is what it is and performance in first place comes from the 
hardware, it doesn't matter how hard you blow the elephant's ass without 
wings the beast do not fly

> > > SATA (of any gen) still does not perform like SCSI.  Let's just look
> > > at spindle speed alone ignoring the other benefits of SCSI.
> >
> > I had no time to test it on a life webserver and probably can't do
> > it so soon but I tell you that a 10K Raptor is faster then a 15K
> > 320Mb SCSI when compiling world or untarring large files. Also NCQ
> > is not reserved to SCSI anymore so when you see the price then it is
> > becoming a valid option for small servers.
>
> And your testing methodogy was...what?

counting Universal Time Units from beginning of the process until the end of 
the process

Hans

--

Prowip Telecom Ltda
AS 22706







A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura.
Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik  https://datacenter.matik.com.br