It all depends on the stuff you run on the servers...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xlogger
2 Servers Load Balanced for html/php.
1x html servers (Opteron supermicro server with 1x 165 chip , 2Gb ram , hardware raid, and 2x 160Gb drives)
1x html servers (Opteron supermicro server with 1x 165 chip , 2Gb ram , hardware raid, and 2x 160Gb drives)
|
Personally, I wouldn't go with 2x 160GB on a RAID but use diskless nodes. If the content those boxes serve fits into their RAM, you won't have much I/O anyway and could spend the money on a second CPU instead.
Be sure to have your webserver (whatever you use) tuned correctly or you won't even get somewhere close to what each of those servers could do on its own.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xlogger
1 Servers just for mysql.
1x sql server (Opteron supermicro server with 1x 175 chip , 2Gb ram , hardware raid, and 2x 160Gb drives)
|
Looks ok. Depending on the size of your databases you might want to add more RAM. Keeping the whole DB cached could improve performance quite a bit.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xlogger
1 massive media server.
1x content server with 400mbps bandwith. (Supermicro 1xXeon3.0Ghz 4Gb DDR Ram 2x 74Gb SATA 10krpm drives in hardware raid 0.)
|
I wouldn't call 74 GB "massive" - a few TB is massive...
If you want to do 400 mbps and have more and lets say 4-10 GB content on that box, your disks may become the bottleneck. If you actually use those 74 GB for content or plan to add even more, go for a 3x 36GB RAID5 or a 4x 36GB RAID10 instead, hook them up to a decent controller (lots of cache, battery-backed if it's not read-only), use faster disks (15k) and add as much RAM as you can afford if performance still sucks...
Just my
, but I run a couple dozen server like those...