Server comments

[Mike Bird]

On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 11:44, Jim Bodkikns (Dakotacom) wrote:
>    I and Sun and HP and IBM and many others respectfully disagree. :)
> 
>    My typical server has several hundred gigs of fast scsi (or raided SATA 
> on the low end) and at least 4 gigs of memory. (Usually P4 on the low side 
> up to Dual Xeons. That is, nothing special on the low end. Its common).
> 
>    Unless you are running boxes that shouldnt be in use anymore, you really 
> dont save anything by not installing the desktop (or more). Installing the 
> minimum is not a server in my opinion. It is an appliance. I am not talking 
> about appliances. (routers, bridges, firewalls etc).

And what hardware do you buy when the application doesn't
need several hundred gigs of fast scsi and 4GB of RAM?

We have Linux servers ranging from 1.4GB to 1.8TB of HD,
and from 32MB to 1.5GB of RAM.  It all depends on what's
needed.

Did you know that kernels can run slower with more RAM
than with less, if the extra RAM is not well utilized?
The details vary with different kernel versions and
page table schemes.

Even if you have to drive hundreds of megabytes per
second of bandwidth, it may be more cost-effective to
use more mid-range servers rather than fewer hi-end
servers.  Consider Google.

So why exactly do you believe that every server
requires 4GB of RAM?

--Mike Bird