Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?

To: Christian Hammers <ch@debian.org>
Cc: debian_amd64 <debian-amd64@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
From: Adam Skutt <askutt@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:35:51 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] 44994B37.8040107@wnec.edu>
Reply-to: askutt@wnec.edu
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20060621131821.023bcce1@xeniac.intern>
References: <[🔎] 20060616175521.M28505@www.etalon.net> <[🔎] 20060620205349.GA4218@zero> <[🔎] 44986E14.3020802@iceworm-enterprises.net> <[🔎] 20060621131821.023bcce1@xeniac.intern>

Christian Hammers wrote:

Normal servers have most of their databases

and web content in RAM anyway as RAM is cheap nowadays

2TB of RAM isn't cheap nor is the hardware to address it.

Hell, 32GB of RAM isn't cheap nor is the hardware to address it.

"Normal" for a database spans quite a range, so be careful before you generalize.

Adam

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Christian Hammers <ch@debian.org>
- Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Matthew Robinson <matt@fone-me.com>
- Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>

References:
- XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: "Hemlock" <michael@etalon.net>
- Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Tom Vier <tmv@comcast.net>
- Re: [SPAM] Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Fielder George Dowding <fgdowding@iceworm-enterprises.net>
- Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
  - From: Christian Hammers <ch@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: [SPAM] Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
Next by Date: Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
Previous by thread: Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
Next by thread: Re: XFS, EXT3 or some other?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread