On Wednesday 14 March 2007 09:56:48 pm John Andersen wrote: > On Wednesday 14 March 2007, Kai Ponte wrote: > > This particulary when compared to a series of $20K servers that can also > > run some form of virtualization for lesser-demand apps. > > 20K? > > Try 1/10th of that.
Heh. I just looked. Last summer we bought 6 HP ML570 dual processor servers at around $8K each and 12 ML580 quad processor servers at $34,000 each. Load the servers with 4 dual core xeon processors and 32 gigs of ram, and you up the costs from the base $5,000 price. We're going to move to 64-bit servers the next go around. Oh, and by the way - I was just looking at the site. I have the choice between Windows Operating Systems, Novell SuSE Linux operating systems*, Red Hat Operating Systems and VMWare. *SUSE is spelled SuSE on the HP site. > I'm running a low end Dell Poweredge server at my office that does > all the file/print/mail management tasks you would expect of Suse > for a network of 20 users. Well, for that low-end processing I can see a low end machine. Typically when I think of servers these days I'm imagining something that is handling image rendering, database processing, transaction queuing and other higher end tasks. Keep in mind these servers are for one application that serves roughly 4,000 users at any given time. Considering we take in $160M a year through the system, I think the prices are justified. :P -- kai Free Compean and Ramos http://www.grassfire.org/142/petition.asp http://www.perfectreign.com/?q=node/46 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
