With the sudden reaching of our $6,000 goal, we have money to go shopping, and I want to do it right away. Jason will be in San Diego on Monday to finish the first round of upgrades, and I'd love it if he had to drive back down there on Friday to install the new big db machine.
We actually have $7,000 in Paypal which I can transfer to our regular bank account, where we already have almost $2,500 of my money that I put in to kick things off. So that's an actual available funds of $9,500, although of course we should NOT spend it all on the database machine unless that's the best thing to do.
Here's what I have lined up at penguincomputing.com for $7,108.00.
Please comment. One thing totally left open here is how to partition the RAID volume, probably Brion and others can give good advice about the best way to do that.
One of the toughest decisions is which exact RAM to buy. 1GB pieces are a lot cheaper, and there are 8 total slots available. So I thought: buy 4 1GB pieces, and there's plenty of room for growth. When 2GB pieces drop in price (which I'm sure they will, and quickly), we have room for 8 gig more or 12 total. Or, if absolutely needed, we could move these 1GB pieces to other machines in our future network, and fill this server up to the full 16gig.
It would cost $778 more to have 2x2Gig = 4 versus what I have, which is 1x4Gig = 4.
For the RAID, I selected 4x36gig in a RAID 5 array, for a logical drive capacity of 105 gig. I also selected 1 extra hot spare drive, just for that much more added reliability. There are many other possibilities for this, and I'm open to recommendations. My impression is that with RAID 5, more drives means more performance, but with enough RAM, we shouldn't be hitting the drives that hard anyway.
Component Summary
Standard Features 3U (5.25") Rackmount Chassis Dual AMD Opteron 200 Series Processors Up to 16GB of PC2100 ECC Reg. DDR RAM Integrated Dual Channel ATA-100 Controller Up to Seven Hot-swappable 3.5" Hard Drive Bays Dual Integrated Gigabit NICs Three Available PCI Slots Integrated Video SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64 Preload Altus 3200 Documentation Penguin Computing Three Year Warranty Selected Features Altus 3200 Hot Swap Power Supply Dual AMD Opteron 246 Processors 4GB Low Profile PC2700 ECC DDR (4 x 1GB) Up to 6 Drives on 2 SCSI Channels in two 3-bay SCA Internal Enclosures LSI 320-2: 2 Channel RAID 64MB w/battery backup 105.0 GB RAID 5 Volume (4+1) 36GB, 10,000RPM Low Profile SCA 52X IDE CD-ROM Rackmount Ball-Bearing Rails (Rack Depth 26") Preload ONLY, SuSE Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64 Standard Three Year Warranty
Resource Summary
PROCESSOR MAIN MEMORY Total installed memory -> 4096 MB Free memory slots -> 1 SIMM Free memory slots -> 4 DIMM NETWORK INTERFACE 1GB/sec Copper -> 2 RJ-45 DISK INTERFACE Total SCA Drive Bays (Low Profile) -> 6 bays Free SCA Drive Bays (Low Profile) -> 1 bays Total 5.25" Drive Bays -> 6 bays IDE Interface -> 4 RAID Channels -> 2 PCI / ISA Slots PCI slots -> 7 total PCI slots PCI slots -> 6 free PCI slots Video
Disk Storage Summary
Mount Point Partition Size File System
RAID 5 Volume (4+1) x 36GB, 10,000RPM Low Profile SCA Logical Capacity: 105 GB unallocated 105.0 GB (100.0)
Unassigned Partitions / ext3 6.00 GB /boot ext3 80 MB /home ext3 0 MB /var ext3 1.02 GB swap swap 2.04 GB TOTALS Logical Capacity: 105.0 GB, Allocated Capacity: 0.0 GB (0.0 %) Unallocated Capacity 105.0 GB (100.0)
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 05:48:55PM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
With the sudden reaching of our $6,000 goal, we have money to go shopping, and I want to do it right away. Jason will be in San Diego on Monday to finish the first round of upgrades, and I'd love it if he had to drive back down there on Friday to install the new big db machine.
We actually have $7,000 in Paypal which I can transfer to our regular bank account, where we already have almost $2,500 of my money that I put in to kick things off. So that's an actual available funds of $9,500, although of course we should NOT spend it all on the database machine unless that's the best thing to do.
Here's what I have lined up at penguincomputing.com for $7,108.00.
Please comment. One thing totally left open here is how to partition the RAID volume, probably Brion and others can give good advice about the best way to do that.
One of the toughest decisions is which exact RAM to buy. 1GB pieces are a lot cheaper, and there are 8 total slots available. So I thought: buy 4 1GB pieces, and there's plenty of room for growth. When 2GB pieces drop in price (which I'm sure they will, and quickly), we have room for 8 gig more or 12 total. Or, if absolutely needed, we could move these 1GB pieces to other machines in our future network, and fill this server up to the full 16gig.
It would cost $778 more to have 2x2Gig = 4 versus what I have, which is 1x4Gig = 4.
For the RAID, I selected 4x36gig in a RAID 5 array, for a logical drive capacity of 105 gig. I also selected 1 extra hot spare drive, just for that much more added reliability. There are many other possibilities for this, and I'm open to recommendations. My impression is that with RAID 5, more drives means more performance, but with enough RAM, we shouldn't be hitting the drives that hard anyway.
[huge clip here]
I think this is a very well balanced machine here, and I think your analysis of the current RAM situation is correct. I say go for it. :)
-- Nick Reinking -- eschewing obfuscation since 1981 -- Minneapolis, MN
I drool at this server's description. The RAM and RAID 5 choices seem wise. The DB's pretty small yet, so HD space shouldn't be an issue... but I'd advise making sure it's fairly easily expanded. Just my paranoia kicking in. But all in all, it sounds like we'll be golden with this setup.
-- Jake, still drooling
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 05:48:55PM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
One of the toughest decisions is which exact RAM to buy. 1GB pieces are a lot cheaper, and there are 8 total slots available. So I thought: buy 4 1GB pieces, and there's plenty of room for growth. When 2GB pieces drop in price (which I'm sure they will, and quickly), we have room for 8 gig more or 12 total. Or, if absolutely needed, we could move these 1GB pieces to other machines in our future network, and fill this server up to the full 16gig.
Sounds very wise. 4 Gigs should fit the current need and is open for future increase.
For the RAID, I selected 4x36gig in a RAID 5 array, for a logical drive capacity of 105 gig. I also selected 1 extra hot spare drive, just for that much more added reliability. There are many other possibilities for this, and I'm open to recommendations. My impression is that with RAID 5, more drives means more performance, but with enough RAM, we shouldn't be hitting the drives that hard anyway.
When doing RAID 5, all two SCSI channels have to work properly. If one fails (e.g. one drive doing some noise on the SCSI cable, one controler chip broken), than the entire RAID will be inaccessible. The RAID 5 configuration can't cover this.
A RAID 0+1 configuration, with data striped over two disks on one adapter and mirrored to the other adapter, is more reliable and probably a little bit faster.
Regards,
JeLuF
Thomas Luft wrote:
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64 Preload
I dunno, but for security and upgrade reasons I would prefer Debian (or is this not available for the Opteron yet?!
I would prefer Redhat just for compatibility with everything else I have. At least at Penguin, SuSE is the only option, and I'm under the vague impression that SuSE is the first-to-market with a GNU/Linux system optimized for Opteron.
I am mostly indifferent between SuSE and Redhat and willing to try Debian if the main developers want it, but SuSE is what will ship on the machine, so we might just accept that and go.
--Jimbo
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 10:13:58PM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Thomas Luft wrote:
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64 Preload
I dunno, but for security and upgrade reasons I would prefer Debian (or is this not available for the Opteron yet?!
I would prefer Redhat just for compatibility with everything else I have. At least at Penguin, SuSE is the only option, and I'm under the vague impression that SuSE is the first-to-market with a GNU/Linux system optimized for Opteron.
I am mostly indifferent between SuSE and Redhat and willing to try Debian if the main developers want it, but SuSE is what will ship on the machine, so we might just accept that and go.
--Jimbo
Well, I prefer Debian over SuSE, it's really easy to administer. But, SuSE is fine as well.
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 10:13:58PM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Thomas Luft wrote:
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64 Preload
I dunno, but for security and upgrade reasons I would prefer Debian (or is this not available for the Opteron yet?!
I would prefer Redhat just for compatibility with everything else I have. At least at Penguin, SuSE is the only option, and I'm under the vague impression that SuSE is the first-to-market with a GNU/Linux system optimized for Opteron.
I am mostly indifferent between SuSE and Redhat and willing to try Debian if the main developers want it, but SuSE is what will ship on the machine, so we might just accept that and go.
I'd like to add that we're having some problems because of using RedHat. RedHat's TeX doesn't include CJK support, so the math mode on Wikipedia can't render CJK characters, in spite of this being possible on my home Debian machine. Recompiling TeX by hand would of course be the other option.
I'd like to add that we're having some problems because of using RedHat. RedHat's TeX doesn't include CJK support, so the math mode on Wikipedia can't render CJK characters, in spite of this being possible on my home Debian machine. Recompiling TeX by hand would of course be the other option.
And Debian is somewhat more freer than Redhat, so it fits with the spirit of Wikipedia. Plus, it really makes life easy for administrators.
Nick Reinking wrote:
And Debian is somewhat more freer than Redhat, so it fits with the spirit of Wikipedia. Plus, it really makes life easy for administrators.
Let's consider the leading alternatives: SuSE, Debian, and Redhat:
1. SuSE - Well, the server is being built by the Penguins at PenguinComputing now. It will come pre-installed with SuSE Enterprise Server 8 for AMD Opteron: http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/server/sles/amd64_landing.html
This sounds state-of-the-art to me, in terms of being 64-bit ready.
An additional plus for SuSe is that it's turn-key, since it's pre-installed. When Jason gets the machine delivered, he can run some quick tests to see that it's functional and then drive down the very next day to install it for us.
2. Debian - I like the idea of using Debian, however...
According to this: http://www.debian.org/ports/ and this: http://www.debian.org/ports/amd64/ and this: http://personal.bgsu.edu/~inathan/amd64/Debian-amd64-FAQ.html
It sounds to me like Debian for AMD64 is not quite ready for prime time.
3. RedHat - according to their website, Redhat Enterprise Linux AS and Redhat Enterprise Linux WS both support AMD64. WS is cheap, AS costs a fortune. Looking at the feature set, I'm not sure why, but anyhow WS seems fine for us. (It looks like AS has support for >2 processors, and more free stuff with it, but hey, free stuff is *free*, right, so why pay more?)
I'm not sure what the advantages of going with RedHat versus SuSe would be, since both are RPM based, and both have everything that we would need. Since both SuSE and Redhat respect the LSB stuff, I think they are so similar that in practical use we'd hardly even notice the difference.
(I had one slackware server, and it drove me nuts because everything was different and just wrong.)
---------------------------------
MY CONCLUSION: Debian is not ready yet, and there's so little difference for our purposes between RedHat and SuSE that we should just go with the pre-install.
But... what's your opinion?
--Jimbo
MY CONCLUSION: Debian is not ready yet, and there's so little difference for our purposes between RedHat and SuSE that we should just go with the pre-install.
But... what's your opinion?
Well, given the choice, I'd say SuSE, for two reasons:
1) SuSE for AMD64 has been around quite a bit longer, so there are probably less bugs in it.
2) YaST rocks.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:02:39AM -0800, Jimmy Wales wrote:
MY CONCLUSION: Debian is not ready yet, and there's so little difference for our purposes between RedHat and SuSE that we should just go with the pre-install.
But... what's your opinion?
RedHat doesn't have CJK LaTeX which is needed for texvc to be able to generate math with CJK characters, what was requested by some people from Japanese Wikipedia. Debian and SuSE seem both to have it. So I'd advice against RedHat.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org