Author: "Varaldi, Marcelo" <Marcelo.Varaldi AT BROU.COM DOT UY>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 20:09:20 -0300
I'm in the process of buying a Linux server for substitution of a Sun E450 (2 Ultrasparc 450Mhz, 2Gb RAM). The actual server performs poorly mainly because of the slow performance of de SBUS architec
Author: Tim Mooney <mooney AT DOGBERT.CC.NDSU.NODAK DOT EDU>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 18:40:08 -0500
In regard to: [Networker] Sizing a Linux x86 server for Networker, Varaldi,...: The actual server performs poorly mainly because of the slow performance of de SBUS architecture and CPUs. We will add
Author: Siobhán Ellis <siobhanellis AT HOTMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:40:33 +1000
Tim is correct. NetWorker is memory and I/O hungry, not really CPU hungry. So, bags of memory and as many discreet IO buses as possible. I will you you an example of a customer I worked with recently
Agree completely on the I/O side, but are you really sure about the memory part. It is quite some time since I tested this (2-3 years ago), but at least back then it didn't make a noticeable differe
Author: Siobhán Ellis <siobhanellis AT HOTMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:06:16 +1000
Memory depends on what you are doing of course. How many sessions you have running at once, how many mmd's, etc Siobhan From: Dag Nygren <dag AT newtech DOT fi> To: Legato NetWorker discussion <NETWO
Author: Ken Gehring <ken.gehring AT GMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:08:23 -0600
Probably not a great choice for networker. We have a linux box and are in the process of migrating to an HP rp4410 and a Quantum PX510 with 8 LTO3 drives. I love Linux but it seems to have the same p