Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 25 Mar 2003 00:46:24 -0500
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Maximum recommended user limits on mail server
Message-ID:  <3E7FED30.3070709@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <003401c2f176$e8ca9260$aa8ffea9@abyss>
References:  <003401c2f176$e8ca9260$aa8ffea9@abyss>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Troy Settle wrote:
> Well said Chuck, but I don't know if I agree with the 50 hour vs. 50
> minute argument.  Anyone who has 2 days of downtime per year needs to
> find a new line of work.

After the past year or so, I'd be tempted to agree with you.  :-/

> I won't argue, however, that downtime on a properly configured Sun 
> would be a fraction of a properly configured i386 box (I'm not too
> familiar with sun, but isn't there a model with hot-swap everything,
> including processor modules?).

Most of Sun's lineup above the entry-class servers support hot-swap 
everything, yes: things like an E4500.  The 3-digit Sun boxes like the 
E250, 280, 450, 480, etc are hot-swap disk only, not CPU or memory.

> My current storage solution (FreeBSD 4-STABLE on a Celeron 600, 512MB,
> RAID5 [amr 466, 16MB, LVD, 40Mbit/s, SCA]) has seen less than 5 hours of
> downtime in the last 30 months.  My SMTP/AV host has seen less than 2
> hours of downtime in the last 18 months.  Nearly all of that downtime
> was planned, and occurred in the wee hours of the morning.

Sounds good to me.  It's not that I believe that decent Intel hardware 
is particularly unreliable, but faults tend to be more serious (if only 
due to less redundancy and ECC thru various datapaths than in Sun's 
hardware).  OpenFirmware's a plus, too...not that I need to advocate OF 
around people using a platform with FICL.

> Personally, I can't see needing a Sun for quite some time.  I know that
> my current solution would handle at least 20k accounts without much
> issue at all.  The only concern I currently have, is that the hardware
> is coming up on 3 years old and should probably be replaced sooner than
> later.

That may be the biggest difference right there, although the presence of 
SCSI adds significant longevity to the lifespan of an x86 server. 
Still, getting replacement parts (ie, hard drives with identical 
cylinder layouts to your original drives) after 3 or 5 years becomes a 
concern that a Sun box wouldn't have.

That's one reason to pay the 3:1 or so markup for Sun-branded versus OEM 
drives.  Another is that you're getting drives that test well-- for 
example, below-average spindle motor current required to maintain speed 
(indicating a slightly better bearing).  Same effect as distributing 
resistors by quality into groups +/- 5%, +/- 10%, and +/- 20% tolerance.

-Chuck


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E7FED30.3070709>