Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 10:39:12 +0100 From: krad <kraduk@gmail.com> To: Peter Giessel <pgiessel@mac.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: deciding UFS vs ZFS Message-ID: <CALfReyes0z8DGPPr%2BV52-UfdxokZ2FDaWUCOU2Hn6WTGNQrBAw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <D0317537-792D-4344-936B-867125B82F7D@mac.com> References: <20140713190308.GA9678@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <20140714071443.42f615c5@X220.alogt.com> <53C326EE.1030405@my.hennepintech.edu> <20140714111221.5d4aaea9@X220.alogt.com> <20140715143821.23638db5@gumby.homeunix.com> <CALfReyf8Rg7rCcob4jSk9XbPLY0MpP52jno9vZ0GUFQGS0Vy-A@mail.gmail.com> <20140716143929.74209529@gumby.homeunix.com> <CALfReycWppVY5BYHeqvunvnUDtwPAke5vug0Kik2_JTnvvfArQ@mail.gmail.com> <20140718180416.715cdc0b@gumby.homeunix.com> <CALfReycMdd-jNvRaiyXO4A=C3eFwuugL74HNoKyb2q4um1L5pg@mail.gmail.com> <20140722133305.228a1690@gumby.homeunix.com> <8699AF5D2BE8E9EBCFFEEE17@192.168.1.50> <20140722222722.70f13ec9@gumby.homeunix.com> <C9D2EE68EC3894786D119AFD@192.168.1.50> <20140724002912.5eda1757@gumby.homeunix.com> <98DFE7A36ED2EBA26E6C710C@192.168.1.50> <EF37D3F4-2B8E-4695-8C75-8ADEE0F91F5A@mac.com> <CALfReycKiTm74a0wy=K%2BZhyXxVBHyNwedy4SOvw3_UUYnZaMbA@mail.gmail.com> <D0317537-792D-4344-936B-867125B82F7D@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
ah you meant i386 compatible not actual i386. My point still stands though. Unless you are scaling out there isnt much difference in costs in actual terms as i got an HP micro server on discount for =C2=A3120 with ram, and i= ts a far more capable machine than a p4. Yes it more expensive, but I would like to see the power requirements for that p4 vs the hp, as im pretty certain the running costs would eat up the margin fairly convincingly over a year or so. Even if it doesnt we are only talking about =C2=A350-60 difference, = which is well worth all the other benefits you get. On 29 July 2014 09:48, Peter Giessel <pgiessel@mac.com> wrote: > > On 2014, Jul 29, at 0:23, krad <kraduk@gmail.com> wrote: > > > you are correct, however if you can afford to put big drives like that > one > > a system you can afford to match up a far more modern cpu with the driv= es > > with a decent amount of ram. Something like the hp microserver is littl= e > > more than =C2=A3100 and is more than capable of handling zfs. 5-6 year = old 2nd > > had kit is as well and it probably cheaper. Also your going to have to > get > > pretty creative to get a modern sata/sas drive to work in an > ((e)*isa|mca) > > based board, which will nullify any cost saving of using decades old > > hardware. > > > That is simply not true. > > At our government surplus store, I can get Pentium 4 computers with 2 GB > of RAM for $25. They have SATA ports on the motherboard, so (2) 3TB SATA > Seagate ST3000DM001 are $99.99 each on Amazon right now with free shippin= g. > For under $250, I can put together redundant server with 3TB RAID 1 > storage. > > Assuming you mean ProLiant 712317-001 Ultra Micro Tower Server, those cos= t > around $400 with 2GB of RAM. 1GB/TB of RAM to storage, it will need more > RAM according to: > "A general rule of thumb is 1GB of RAM for every 1TB of storage.=E2=80=9D > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/filesystems-zfs.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALfReyes0z8DGPPr%2BV52-UfdxokZ2FDaWUCOU2Hn6WTGNQrBAw>