On Tuesday 15 March 2005 12:03 pm, jeff wrote: > At work we are going to set up a new fileserver Linux w/ Samba. Get rid > of the last @#^$%@ windows server finally :) > > We are looking at using a areca SATA RAID controller with lots of > drives. I have never used SATA RAID, only SCSI. What kind of > processor(s) and RAM am I going to need for this?
What kind of load? How big is the average working set? How big are the files? Generally very large? All small? I would speculate that if it's (true) hardware raid, then the only real load on the cpu is the fs layer and the network stack--thus as long as it is fast enough to keep the I/O queues busy and the packets flowing, it's enough. As for ram--quantity of ram and your I/O performance determine your latency--ie cache hit or miss. You'll need to know your load patterns for this. If it is not hardware raid, that's a whole different game--you'll need to consider how many cycles are consumed in the md layer, and consider SMP to reduce the additional latency incurred by them. What hardware was the windows-box being which is being replaced using? Was it sufficient for the load? That's probably your most useful metric. -- Respectfully, Nicholas Leippe Sales Team Automation, LLC 1335 West 1650 North, Suite C Springville, UT 84663 +1 801.853.4090 http://www.salesteamautomation.com .===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
