Site going down for maintenance

[Phade]

Hey,

I'll have to get back with you on that one...

Phade.

[dokool]

Hey,

I'll have to get back with you on that one...

Phade.

Extend the Golden Donut further, make a Golden Renderbox!

[Phade]

Hey,

It would probably take more time to upload the info to the server than to actually render it and return the result.

Phade.

[dwchang]

We're going from a dual Xeon w/512M RAM box to a dual Opteron w/8G RAM. That should help with site performance.

*cough* Told ya so *cough*

It would probably take more time to upload the info to the server than to actually render it and return the result.

I've not done any render work on an Opteron set-up, but I imagine you're right. My dual 2.0 Ghz Athlon (not Opteron or 64-bit) renders most AE jobs for me in less than a minute. I imagine it'd take a lot longer to upload the video data and run whatever script it'd have.

Figured I'd come in and brag since now the mighty Phade has defected to the AMD-side .

[Phade]

Hey,

I'm loyal to no product. I always go for best bang-for-buck configuration no matter what. Linux: best bang-for-buck. Apache: best bang-for-buck. MySQL: best bang-for-buck. PHP: best bang-for-buck. AMD Opteron: currently best bang-for-buck BY FAR.

Can you imagine how much the site would cost if we went with Windows 2003 Server, Microsoft SQL Server, and Intel 64-bit processors? It would be many tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars!! Instead, we get reliable kick-ass performance on the cheap. How is it that MS and Intel defend their prices? Oh yeah, by repressing competition rather than making a better product.

[supresses self before all-out zealot flame war breaks out]

Phade.

[Kalium]

How is it that MS and Intel defend their prices? Oh yeah, by repressing competition rather than making a better product.

[supresses self before all-out zealot flame war breaks out]

I don't think you'll get too many people defending either MS or Intel around here. For most anything, AMDs outperform Intels. Windows is only useful because certain Linux projects aren't fully mature yet.

[dwchang]

Hey,

I'm loyal to no product. I always go for best bang-for-buck configuration no matter what. Linux: best bang-for-buck. Apache: best bang-for-buck. MySQL: best bang-for-buck. PHP: best bang-for-buck. AMD Opteron: currently best bang-for-buck BY FAR.

Can you imagine how much the site would cost if we went with Windows 2003 Server, Microsoft SQL Server, and Intel 64-bit processors? It would be many tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars!! Instead, we get reliable kick-ass performance on the cheap. How is it that MS and Intel defend their prices? Oh yeah, by repressing competition rather than making a better product.

[supresses self before all-out zealot flame war breaks out]

Phade.

No I agree in that blind loyalty is retarded and I'm glad to see that you thought this through and went with my company . Hopefully the server will continue to do well and later down the road, we'll have another good product and you'll go with us again .

I should talk to my Senior Manager and tell him about this. A site with so many users, so much traffic, etc. I wonder if they'd give you stuff for free

[trythil]

Hey,

I'm loyal to no product. I always go for best bang-for-buck configuration no matter what. Linux: best bang-for-buck.

Only if you're using the 2.6 branch
The performance improvements are just insane.

[Phade]

Hey trythil,

2.6.3

Phade.

[trythil]

Hey trythil,

2.6.3

Phade.