On Apr 15, 2005, at 8:10 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:

For example, I didn't see many other $7000 proposals have
have nearly 10GB of ram, or over a dozen CPUs (even counting
the raid controllers), or over a half a terrabyte of storage ,
or capable of 5-10 Gbit/sec of network traffic...  The extra

And how much are you spending on the switch that will carry 10Gb/sec traffic?

capacity would allow me to have redundancy that would somewhat
make up for the flakier hardware, no raid, etc.

it would work for some class of applications which are pretty much read-only. and don't forget to factor in the overhead of the replication...

Thoughts? Over the next couple months I'll be evaluating a cluster of 4 systems almost exactly as I described (but with cheaper dual hard drives in each system), for a GIS system that does lend itself well to application-level partitioning.

I'd go with fewer bigger boxes with RAID so i can sleep better at night :-)

Vivek Khera, Ph.D. +1-301-869-4449 x806

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to