On Fri, 9 Apr 2004, Camille Constans wrote:
On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 12:12:14 +0200 (CEST) Alfio Puglisi puglisi@arcetri.astro.it wrote:
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:40:34 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
Actually, NO. This is a DATABASE SERVER. Databases flush data to disk to ensure data integrity. No ammount of RAM can speed up the process of an fsync() as the data must physically be moved from system memory to the physical drives.
Most disk access on suda is repeated reading. A bi of >6000 is common. Bo is much lower. Cpus are mostly idle, the thing is completely i/o bound currently.
[[meta:Wikimedia_servers]] says that suda is a dual opteron with 72 GB SCSI raid (level 1 I suppose). Is this information correct? It doesn't seem a slow disk configuration
it's raid 5, 3 x 36GB drive. A small and slow disk configuration
Ouch. If the current controller is capable, i would invest the money in multiple 73GB 15k rpm disks, say 5 of them in raid5 to have around 280 GB of fast storage. Or, 4 of them in raid 1 to have 140 GB of safer storage.
Alfio