Re: [cobalt-users] OT: Celeron or Full P4?

[Greg Boehnlein <damin@xxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 7 May 2004, Jeff Lasman wrote:

> On Thursday 06 May 2004 02:28 pm, Greg Hewitt-Long wrote:
> 
> > if you could just email me the details to this address, I'd like to
> > talk to them
> 
> taken offlist.
> 
> > I'll spend what it takes, but we only host a thousand or so domains,
> > the need for a monster server isn't here yet, we plan on using two
> > identical servers for spam/anti-virus, which will front up the final
> > destination servers - these will only be pass-through, but will need
> > to hand the load of about 10 raq's email.
> 
> For 10 RaQs worth of email I'd definitely go P4.

I'd seriously look at the AMD Operteron platform. It will give you quite a 
bit more "32 bit bang for the buck" than the P4 platform. I've been doing 
performance tests of comparable Mhz P4 and Opteron systems, and the 
Opteron's are about 30 to 32% more efficient at processing. Many reasons 
for this (1 Meg L2 cache, more instructions / cycle etc.) but given the 
price/performance ratio of the Opteron vs. the P4, I can't see why anyone 
wouldn't want to use the AMD processors.

Also, you might seriously want to consider using a linux IPVS setup (Ip 
Virtual Server) for your spam filtering, as spam can only increase, and 
you'll be able to slap additional nodes into your cluster as the load goes 
up.

We currently can handle upwards of 2,000,000 messages / day accross three 
back-end P4 boxes using our Linux IPVS setup.

We use RedHat EL for our IPVS routers, but you can achieve the same 
thing with Free stuff from the Ultra Monkey project: 
http://www.ultramonkey.org

If you have any more questions, please feel free to contact me.

-- 
    Vice President of N2Net, a New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Company
         http://www.n2net.net Where everything clicks into place!
                             KP-216-121-ST