[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re[2]: Linux Server



Eli Marmor <marmor@elmar.co.il> wrote:

>  > b) How important is the internal cache of the CPU? is a PII enough.
>  
>  While the performance of the processors almost doubles itself
>  annually, it takes many years for the memory. So the cache is VERY
>  critical. The only reason why small caches are enough for most of us,
>  is because we are not 20 people on the same machine. Think how much
>  cache you would want for yourself (for single user). Now multiply it
>  by 20, and divide by the number of processors. Since we are misers,
>  divide it again by 2. This is what you need.

Actually, I'm not sure the cache is of real importance for desktop-level
applications. RAM is, of course. However, no amount of RAM will be enough
without proper limits (datasize, memoryuse, cputime) being set to prohibit
malicious apps like netscape eating all the system resources. This is true,
of course, not only for Linux.

With the above in mind, I believe the configuration you mentioned should be
OK (but again, depneding on how frequently you want your users be forced to
restart netscape, it may be worth to extend the RAM to 1GB).

Overall, if you're going to setup the system from scratch (i.e., buying the
NCD/X terminals now) - don't do it. Low-end diskless NFS clients (plus a
mid-end central NFS server) will be both much cheaper and faster in total.

Regards,

Evgeny


--
   ____________________________________________________________
  / Evgeny Stambulchik  <fnevgeny@plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il>  \
 /  Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel \  \
 |  Phone : (972)8-934-3610  == | == FAX   : (972)8-934-3491 |  |
 |  URL   :    http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/~fnevgeny/  |  |
 |  Finger for PGP key >=====================================+  | 
 |______________________________________________________________|