Back to Article

  • kherman - Wednesday, August 25, 2004 - link

    How about a pic of that motherboard! Reply
  • JasonClark - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link

    Penpun, I updated the article with the URL's, and correct a spelling error on my end. It's CI Designs not CSI Designs, guess I watch a bit to much CSI :) Reply
  • penpun - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link

    "CSI Designs RMHR 9000"

    where can we find more info on this company and their products? a quick google search didn't reveal anything obvious.
  • Phiro - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link

    Not sure if you want to give out these numbers, but how many page views did you have in the last 30 days, and how many unique visitors? Reply
  • JasonClark - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link


    Because, we have standardized on the microsoft platform, and that is where our expertise lies. Performance-wise, a well tuned .Net application on windows will run just as good as it will on linux if not better as the framework was built on the windows platform.

    MySQL is no where close to SQL Server in terms of an enterprise database server (at least not yet). No stored procedures, triggers etc. 5.0 is a way off yet, which should include those features. Also the tools for MySQL are terrible in comparison to SQL Enterprise Manager. SQL Server is where it's at in terms of productivity, enterprise class features and the best management tools in the business.

    As #22 said, productivity is key, why run something you are not familiar with and is not the best platform for a .NET application? We're not interested in PHP or any other language.
  • yelo333 - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link

    #21, probably familiarity. Which means productivity.

    IIRC, they also chose the forums software this way...

    Remember, nobody(well, hardly anybody) can know all combinations of software just as well as another.

    There are probably more reasons, or completely different ones, so wait around for the "official" answer. ;)
  • unhaiduc - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link

    This may be a dumb question, but why don't you guys run a Linux/Apache webserver? or even Win/Apache?.. MySQL? Reply
  • JasonClark - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Sharkeeper, we are no where near 16,000 sessions simultaneous... only 3-4000, no slow down at all at that level. Reply
  • VirtualLarry - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Reflex, my friend also has a quad-proc Slot-II Xeon Compaq server, dual-redundant sets of 3 cooling fans, 2+1 redundant PSUs, hot-swap 64-bit PCI, SCSI RAID, etc., crazy overkill kind of stuff for home. He has a rack-mount case in his kitchen. :P Oh yeah, it definately DOES sound like a jet plane taking off when he turns the thing one. It's pretty snappy though, good for LAN game servers and stuff. It also uses an insane memory-expansion daughterboard, with its own buffer chips, can accept up to 16 or maybe even 32GB of registered ECC SDR memory, in quad-interleaved groups of 4 DIMMs. I think he just has 4 x 256MB or 4 x 128MB now, because he got the RAM for cheap.
  • sharkeeper - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Interesting choice of firewall. What happens when it get saturated? I've implemented NS25's in small enterprises with ~200 or so users and was concerned. Their utilisation is nowhere near what yours would be.

  • JasonClark - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    #15, we used a quad opteron from the last review we did, Tyan also has a board out now, which is supposed to be decent.

    #16, tens of millions ;) Funny enough the most popular searched word on the main website is ASUS. Last month there were around 300,000 searches.
  • bobbozzo - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Hi, How many Page Views does AnandTech get each month?

    How many searches do your users do?

  • kaborka - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    The article identified the CSI Designs RMHR 9000 case for the RAID array, but I didn't see which case and motherboard you picked for the computer. Did I miss this? We need to build a similar rig at work, and I'd like to know. Reply
  • JasonClark - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    #5, Yep windows 2003 enterprise 32 bit, 64 bit is still beta. Yes it supports 8GB of memory, it supports a maximum of 32GB of memory. SQL uses the AWE (Address Windowing Extensions) extensions to access all 8GB. It cost a fair bit, that's for sure. But, it was necessary, especially the firewall.

    #9, RAID 10 is faster, and is just as reliable. It is just more expensive as you get less space due to the mirror. Parity checks are expensive on databases, you would need a very expensive raid card to get close to RAID 10 performance.

    #13, you betcha, we're tired of it as well. It won't be long now at all, we're talking weeks or less.
  • nourdmrolNMT1 - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    " since we've had a few "issues" with ColdFusion under load on the forums recently."

    JRUN JRUN, RUN J RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!! YAY FINALLY!!!

  • DeeSlanger - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Nice, lil tech tidbit for a Sunday read. Reply
  • Filibuster - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link


    Raid 10 is just as reliable as Raid 5 but is not impeded by write performance because there is no parity to compute during writing.
    It is 2 sets of 4 drives in a mirror.

    In Raid 5 you'd have 8 drives and if _any_ two go out your array is dead, plus writes will be slower. If one drive goes out the performance will be even worse while it is not in service and during rebuilding.

    In Raid 10 with 8 drives you could potentially lose up to 4 drives and still be ok, depending on which 4 they are, and writes will be signigicantly faster (and the controller doesn't have to be as expensive). The only time a 2 drive failure will lose the array is if they are the same pair of drives in the mirror. If you lose a drive your performance will not suffer either except during rebuilding, which again, does not require calculating parity to do it so even this will be faster.
  • DopeFiend - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    #1: That appears to be a buffer expansion slot for an onboard RAID controller. I've seen them before at work with the rackmounts we make, but I'm not entirely sure why it's an SDR slot! Reply
  • DopeFiend - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    (oops, blank post above).

    Why RAID-10 and not RAID-5? I can understand the need for performance, but surely RAID-5 would make more sense from a reliability standpoint?
  • DopeFiend - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

  • ariafrost - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Impressive upgrades :) Nice work, AT! BTW, I'm going to have to be a spelling nazi and recommend that "NOC factility" be corrected to "NOC facility" on the home page... Reply
  • Ecmaster76 - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    #1 Just a guess, but that could be a memory expansion slot for the raid controller or some other integrated device. Reply
  • sprockkets - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition? Isn't that alone cost thousands of dollars? Is it 64 bit, or more importantly, can it support 8GB on a 32 bit mode processor?

    Around $3700 time four for processors, around what $1000 for the board, $300 time 8 for the hdds, around what $100 ? for the raid controller, $1800 for Windows Server 2003 with 25 CALs, around $250 times 8 for PC3200 1GB ECC Registered ram sticks, assuming $300 for other stuff, that's what close to $20,000 HOLY $$$$ and that's not including the firewall and other stuff!!!

    How much did it cost you, really?
  • Reflex - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    #2: A lot. This is the type of equipment you install in a temperature controlled server room, not a bedroom. It is not designed with heat or noise as primary concerns. Reliabilty is the number one issue, the number two is performance. Chances are it sounds similiar to a jet taking off but at a bit lower a level, I have a Compaq Proliant Xeon quad proc system at my house just for messing around and WOW is it loud. Reply
  • Jeff7181 - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    I love these articles... too bad we probably won't see one for quite some time now that you've got all this brand new stuff :) Reply
  • skunkbuster - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    i'm curious how much heat and noise does all of this produce? Reply
  • Chuckles - Sunday, August 22, 2004 - link

    In this picture;
    (Page 1 top image)
    The forward right RAM bank appears to have an extra slot just forward of the main bank. Given its slot configuration it kinda looks like a 168-pin SDRAM slot. What is it, and what is its purpose?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now