Re: [attachments are now working] Site is back, attachments aren't yet. Read this ple
I agree with Shovenose here *gasp*
While I love old workstation/server hardware, for actual usage, these sort of things do matter. Since this is an actual running website (and a relatively active one at that) power usage and reliability do add up. While I usually (and for my purpouses, still do) tout the build quality of this sort of hardware, given what (at least partially) ruined the old server, I wouldn't feel good replacing old with somewhat less old.
Yeah, for my workstations I do run somewhat old and well-used 10K drives in RAID 0, but there's no way in hell I'd do that for anything critical (let alone a web or backup server). Not to say Brethin's mentioned hardware is anything like that (it isn't; it's actually some legitimately beefy hardware), but the point is that sometimes going used/older works fine (if not better). Other times, like this, newer and fresh is the only rational solution.
Originally posted by shovenose
View Post
While I love old workstation/server hardware, for actual usage, these sort of things do matter. Since this is an actual running website (and a relatively active one at that) power usage and reliability do add up. While I usually (and for my purpouses, still do) tout the build quality of this sort of hardware, given what (at least partially) ruined the old server, I wouldn't feel good replacing old with somewhat less old.
Yeah, for my workstations I do run somewhat old and well-used 10K drives in RAID 0, but there's no way in hell I'd do that for anything critical (let alone a web or backup server). Not to say Brethin's mentioned hardware is anything like that (it isn't; it's actually some legitimately beefy hardware), but the point is that sometimes going used/older works fine (if not better). Other times, like this, newer and fresh is the only rational solution.
Comment