Re: Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help
From: Bob Bailin (72027.3605_at_compuserve.com)
Date: 07/16/03
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- In reply to: Lee and Nadine: "Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- Next in thread: Brian K. White: "Re: Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:03:51 -0400
"Lee and Nadine" <lee.nadine@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Ic5Ra.81020$JA5.1643994@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
> We are looking at different aspects on what to do about our older unix sco
> 5.5 server that tends to run slow at times (333mhz with 196 meg ram).
using
> cpqmon it shows the CPU "2 sec avg" the "10 sec avg" and the "20 sec avg"
as
> maxxed out when things run slow. One idea was to buy another processor
and
> more ram, however this is what one supplier has told us - see below. I
have
> no idea if what he is saying is correct of if hes trying to drum up more
> sales. Some ideas on what he wrote would be greatly appreciated.
>
> As quickly discussed on the phone today the server is dual processor
> capable.
>
> Your server has only 1 processor.
>
> Memory is not an issue unless the system is swapping , if this was the
case
> on your system you would not be able to login.
Not true, but when the system starts swapping overall performance drops
dramatically.
>
> Your system is not swapping and so is not the cause of the slow system.
>
> The server is only 333 MHz, what would a 5 year old 333 MHz PC with 75
users
> logged in run like?
Having recently upgraded a dual Pentium II Overdrive Processor (333MHz) last
year
that had only 20 active users max at any given time, I can't imagine your
performance
with only a single processor and 75 users, unless 70 of them are doing only
data entry/inquiry.
>
> The Unix system takes full advantage of Symmetric Multi Processing when
the
> SMP license is installed.
>
> The only advantage of this would be seen when the system as it stands gets
> processor bound and slows down , with dual processors the load is shared
and
> this processor bound state takes a little longer to occur .
>
> A second processor does not speed up a server but shares load at current
> processor speed. i.e. 333Mhz
No single task by itself will run faster, but overall system performance
will appear
to be faster.
>
> It should be noted that even with a second processor the system may become
> processor bound very quickly.
>
> Estimated Pricing:
I'm glad Stuart mentioned the NZ$, otherwise I was going to comment on the
somewhat extravagant pricing.
>
> SCO Unix SMP License
> $2,900
>
> Second 333 MHz Processor [ subject to availability]
> $1,000
You may also need an additional VRM (Voltage Regulator Module) if a 2nd
one is not already present. Very hard to find for obsolete motherboards.
>
> Installation approximately 2 days labour [ out of hours rate ]
> $ 2,400
Unless your original installer had the foresight to install the SMP module
(without
a license) during the original installation, this figure of 2 days is almost
reasonable.
In order to install SMP on a fully patched 5.0.5 system, you have to remove,
in
the proper order, over 2 dozen patches in addition to the rs505a supplement,
and
then reinstall all of them after installing SMP.
If SMP is already there, you just have to
>
> Plus travel and accommodation
>
> Estimated pricing does not include GST.
>
>
>
> As discussed this is not a very good idea due to the small possible
> advantage it may bring during peek usage and cost benefit. Even after
> installation you may find that there has been no improvement in
performance
> .
>
> Again as mentioned on the phone we need to get the new server installed as
> soon as possible so users can benefit from superior technology
enhancements
> of the past 5 years.
We upgraded to a dual Pentium III 1.4GHz system with 512MB, due to the
excessive
cost of Pentium 4 Xeon systems at the time. Yesterday, Intel announced a
price drop
for most Xeon processors, bringing some of them down to the price we paid
for the
PIII processors last year, so that would be the direction to go today.
DDR memory is significantly faster than the PC66 you're using now, and newer
servers
may have 66MHz PCI bus slots for a faster Ultra 320 SCSI adapter and disks.
I agree that the money, inflated as it is, would be better spent on a new
server.
Upgrade to 5.0.7 while you're at it.
Bob
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- In reply to: Lee and Nadine: "Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- Next in thread: Brian K. White: "Re: Would a 2nd processor really be a waste of time???? help"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
