|
|
#1
27th Jun 2007, 03:42
|
|||
|
|||
|
Morning all!
I'm currently looking to purchase a server that will provide a large information database program to over 200 users ... Within my budget I can either choose to have a 1.86GHz single quad core Intel processor or a dual quad core processors. Just wondering if the latter is really needed ... Would there be much of a difference in terms of performance? Bit overkill? Thanks! |
|
#2
27th Jun 2007, 06:45
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Hi Mousy
__________________
Welcome to TCF Our Technical person Alex will be online shortly with his ideas as to what you would require. Please bear with us. :) My System: #
|
|
#3
29th Jun 2007, 00:33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is it oracle, MS SQL etc...? If you're running Oracle i think they licence per core (ouch) and MSSQL will be licenced per physical processor, so consider that. You might still only want to licence one processor/4 cores and set aside the other to deal with any other processing.
How many concurrent users? The other thing not to scrimp on is the underlying IO, get at least 2 drives, one for OS & programs and the second to hold the database files, preferable SAS. If you are using full logging then three is recommended, one for os, one for data and the third for logs. We just deployed a HP 2.13ghz Quad Core, 3 73GB SAS drives, MSSQL 2005 to run an financial system with 30 concurrent user, and it works fine. I'd be tempted to say no about the second processor, get more memory and faster storage, or just save the cash. But its obviously difficult without first fully understanding the requirements/load on the system. |
