Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 Sep 2005 23:30:26 +0300
From:      "ANdrei" <lists@hausro.de>
To:        "Manuel Rabade Garcia" <mig@rabade.net>
Cc:        freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: building an older server
Message-ID:  <015101c5af37$4456d2d0$b47ba8c0@maximus>
References:  <000101c5ac82$66f25290$b47ba8c0@maximus><20050829171305.GA70155@neptune.atopia.net><001e01c5ace5$f62c16e0$b47ba8c0@maximus> <20050829222948.25b3993e@laptop.rabade.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
> 2x400 Mhz Celerons can have worst performance than a single 800 Mhz
> processor (and I bet they will if the single processor is a P3 or
> even another Celeron). But for your requirements 2 Celerons are enough,
> and SMP is always better to rise your geeky level xDDDD

these are also PIII, I think, right? anyway, I thought that having 2 procs 
can spread the jobs among them and get better performance when running tasks 
like webservers, database-servers and so on... Was I so wrong? i can use a 
Duron 1000MHz but on a cheap SiS board with only SDRam support, too, and 
integrated video/LAN, will this be much better? Shall I risk that, as the 
board is for sure not as stable as an Abit...?

> For the wireless, most of the cheap 802.11g Access Points change their
> mode (and of course all the clients also) to 802.11b if there is a
> 802.11b client. You can setup the Access Point to handle only 802.11b
> or 802.11g clients, but that depends of the Model.

I have a non-cheap one, it lets 11b and 11g co-exist it seems... but I don't 
want to use 11b anyway, as I'll do some file-transfers (to and from the 
server, over the wifi) and it will take ages for a 500MB file to transfer on 
11MBps maximum speed... so that's why I need 11g, anyway...

> WEP (64 and 128 bits) are very insecure against modern attacks
> (some methods can broke 128 bits keys in ~10 minutes, even without
> traffic). Check out an IP Sec or WPA-PSK to secure your wireless network
> if you care :).

I care, but for WPA-PSK I have to go to FreeBSD 6.0, right? will the STABLE 
be the right option? 5.x will never support WPA-PSK, it seems...
anybody any sidenotes/impressions on using WPA-PSK? works out of the box? :)

> I have a HighPoint HPT374 in a server and works very fine (with the
> propietary drivers :-/). Look in the HighPoint page if they support
> FreeBSD for that controller, or the HARDWARE.txt as somebody else
> suggests.

been contacting them, they said they didn't write the driver for this 
controller, but the FreeBSD people did... So no proprietary driver, but it 
is supported by the ATA driver, only there were some issues with using more 
than 2 disks on the controller (that supports up to four). can anybody 
confirm if it was fixed or not? I'll try it after my exams, if nobody is 
using it :)
anyway, to the HPT-using-people out there: if you have an older controller, 
that's not listed on the suuport page of HighPoint anymore, just ask the 
support guys from HPT by email for everything, insist a bit, and they'll 
help you out. I even got some latest beta BIOSes and a beta XP driver (never 
released officially) from them, after 2 mails... they're quite nice and well 
informed, so thumbs up for HighPoint.

tks for your replies, and sorry I answer only today.

Andrei 




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?015101c5af37$4456d2d0$b47ba8c0>