Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:23:11 -0500 (EST) From: Dan Swartzendruber <druber@kersur.net> To: N <niels@bakker.net> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RAID solutions? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.981216112147.18060B-100000@mail.kersur.net> In-Reply-To: <981216170313.30310A-100000@liquid.tpb.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, N wrote: > >> I have a box with 20 disks, split over four controllers (yes, you guessed > >> it: a news server). Running 3.0-CURRENT from somewhere last month. Very > >> happy with FreeBSD, very unhappy with INN. > > Unhappy how? Why? > > CNFS isn't too fast. See news.software.nntp and the inn-workers@isc.org > archives, among others. Oh, you too? I gave CNFS a shot for a couple of months. Beaucoup complaints from users about horrible speed. Auto-expiration is cool, but not at this price. Two days ago, I switched back to traditional, although I'm thinking of trying timehash. Anyone have any opinions on that? > >> I think you'd be better off with 4 GB disks - less latency when you have > >> to do a *lot* of seeks (like you have to for a news swerver), but that's > >> more a question for news.software.nntp. > > That is my first choice, but that requires twice the hardware. I'll have > > to run that by management... > > On the other hand, the hardware is cheaper. You can run Diablo on 9GB > disks, but a reader machine is a different beast altogether, especially > if you use traditional spool. > > And didn't mgt. give you a bag of money to throw at the problem anyway? :-) Well, yeah, but there are limits :) 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?Pine.BSF.3.96.981216112147.18060B-100000>