Texas [hk] Palace
JoeBlow
Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12899Members
Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12899Members
<div class="IPBDescription">New and Improved</div> We have just finished some major upgrades to our already great server and wanted to let you know. The server is in Dallas, TX and has been up for almost a year now. We have recently added a sATA RAID 1 setup, another GB of RAM, and upgraded our connection to a private VLAN with a 100Mbit connection to a gigabit network (with gigabit to multiple major backbones). You will have a hard time finding a better connection than you can get at our colo.
We host a 22 player server at ns.clanhk.org:27015
a 16 player server at ns.clanhk.org:27016
and a 12 player tournament mode server at ns.clanhk.org:27017
Feel free to drop by our site (http://www.clanhk.org), our channel #harikari, or any of our servers
Thanks,
Phage
We host a 22 player server at ns.clanhk.org:27015
a 16 player server at ns.clanhk.org:27016
and a 12 player tournament mode server at ns.clanhk.org:27017
Feel free to drop by our site (http://www.clanhk.org), our channel #harikari, or any of our servers
Thanks,
Phage
Comments
Just curious, why was a RAID-1 chosen? If your going for speed, while this is the most redundant it slows it down a bit <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> RAID-5 is better IMHO, but also requires 3 Hard Drives Instead of 2. And are these the <a href='http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=14&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4570,2998' target='_blank'>new faster SATA drives</a>, or the ones that are merely just using the <a href='http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=14&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4570,2999' target='_blank'>interface but the same IDE specs</a>?
Nothing terribly important, just me being my curious geeky self <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Just curious, why was a RAID-1 chosen? If your going for speed, while this is the most redundant it slows it down a bit <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> RAID-5 is better IMHO, but also requires 3 Hard Drives Instead of 2. And are these the <a href='http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=14&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4570,2998' target='_blank'>new faster SATA drives</a>, or the ones that are merely just using the <a href='http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=14&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4570,2999' target='_blank'>interface but the same IDE specs</a>?
Nothing terribly important, just me being my curious geeky self <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hello.
Here is a link for you to check for exact hardware specs: <a href='http://www.clanhk.org/modules.php?name=FAQ&myfaq=yes&id_cat=5&categories=About+the+Server#10' target='_blank'>http://www.clanhk.org/modules.php?name=FAQ...t+the+Server#10</a>
Here is a link that explains how we had to modify the Linux driver to make the serialATA controller stable, plus it has performance metrics: <a href='http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=111300&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0' target='_blank'>http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=1...der=asc&start=0</a>
RAID-5 is completely unappropraite for our situation for several reasons:
<ul><li>We run lots of database intensive things. RAID-5 utterly blows for transaction-based loads.
<li>We only have 2 serialATA ports on our motherboard.
<li>We're already over-subscribing the bandwidth on the PCI bus. Parallel sequential reads/write exceed 100MB/sec. Plus our network controllers are also on the PCI bus.
<li>RAID-1 substantialy increases read performance, especially for small random seeks and parallel sequential reads. Our loads are read intensive.
<li>RAID-1 has far less CPU overhead.</ul>
We're not space limited. We previously only had an 18GB SCSI drive. On the new RAID subsystem we only have 22 GB currently allocated. I can add space on the fly through LVM--Logical Volume Manager--as I need it, where I need it and grow my filesystems up (reiserfs). In the future, I can hot-swap out the harddrives for bigger, better ones to get more space without taking the system down as well.
For $230, you can't beat the performance/price and reliability/price ratios we've achieved. RAID5 would be good for a slower, less busy storage volume that was capacity intensive.
What I'm really waiting on is SATA 2.0 with NCQ. Once there are controllers and harddrives with NCQ suport and libata has matured along with the 2.6 kernel, we'll be able to create some pretty wicked storage solutions on the cheap.
EDIT: One more question, you have done a lot of customizing to this system, but did you purchase it originally from a retailer or did you build it from the ground up? I assume since its hosted at The Planet you have a rack solution because that is cheaper for their service. Just curious if you purchased the system or have built it up.
EDIT: One more question, you have done a lot of customizing to this system, but did you purchase it originally from a retailer or did you build it from the ground up? I assume since its hosted at The Planet you have a rack solution because that is cheaper for their service. Just curious if you purchased the system or have built it up. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Completely custom setup. It's in a ATX Tower case, colocated not rented.