|Is there a permanent list of who's running what?|
| 1:29 pm on Jun 6, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Is there something like Netcraft's What's that Site Running that applies to hardware; i.e. a survey that tells you what hardware a site or sites in general are using?
I'm learning to host a website out of my basement (I have a 15mbps up/down fiber to my house.) I currently have an 866 Mhz leftover machine running my website, but it's just not enough for the database driven nature of my site. Everyone tells me what I have should be enough, but the CPU and memory (384) is constantly maxed, and I don't have the experience nor money to decide how much hardware I need for my simple and unpopular site (<30k hits a month).
So a) is there a site that tells me how much I should need to have a fast site, hopefully based on whatever everyone else has; b) I always see state surplus servers with two or three 600 Mhz processors, is that faster than spending $200 on one 2 Ghz processor?
Maybe we should have a permanent thread or survey about what people are using or need to use.
[edited by: jatar_k at 5:27 pm (utc) on June 6, 2006]
[edit reason] no urls thanks [/edit]
| 5:09 pm on Jun 6, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Processor speed is an unlikely bottleneck for database-intensive applications.
(Although do realize that you can't compare today's processors with previous generations of chips on a mHz per mHz basis. Your 866 mHz system is probably a Pentium III? A Pentium IV or Athlon 64 is roughly twice as fast as a Pentium III at the same clock speed.)
But I cringe to think what kind of disk drive is likely attached to an old, 866 mHz leftover system. The performance increases in disk drives over the past few years have been substantial.
The latest crop of SATA drives come close to rivaling the hottest SCSI drives, and at a cost not much higher than PATA drives. Of course, your old motherboard is unlikely to support SATA drives, so you will need either an add-in card or a new motherboard.
What OS are you running? With an 866 mHz processor and low memory, I HOPE it's a Linux version, and not Microsoft Windows. That should be plenty of memory for Linux. It's easy to misinterpret Linux memory-usage reporting. If you ARE using Linux, type "free" in a console window. Look at the SECOND line ("-/+ buffers/cache). Linux sucks-up nearly all of available memory for buffers and cache, and gives it back as needed.
| 8:39 pm on Jun 6, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thank you for that reply. Yes, I am using Windows 2003 Server. I've played with Linux, but I figured the learning curve would be less with Windows... I worried that may be the problem.
So, short answer: I need a newer processor, at any speed, lots of RAM and a SATA drive. Now the question is always what to do first, since I'm unwilling to put too much money into this...