>I plan to run a (redhat v7.2 linux) apache server soon. In a nutshell,
>do dual 400 celerons have anything more to offer an apache server than
>a single 1Ghz celeron FC-PGA does?
>My existing (NT/IIS)server is a DUAL celeron abit motherboard with 2
>400Mhz CELERONs and 512M of ECC RAM. This board MAXs out at celeron
>500's which I cant even find so let's assume the dual processors will
>STAY at 400Mhz.
So, is the NT/IIS running the same site you plan to run with
Linux/Apache? Are your CPUs fully utilised at the moment (with NT/IIS)?
If not, I don't see why your CPUs would be the limiting factor with
Apache/Linux setup, either. If you're close to fully using the CPU
capacity, you might see what documents exist on tuning Apache for
Also, depending on your web content, the bottleneck might well be
elsewhere. Your network connection? You disks? Amount of RAM?
Quote:>Obviously the newer 815 MB has all sorts of pluses over the older ABit
>board. (133 ram,newer bios etc). (is the older boards ECC RAM a plus?)
BIOS does not play a role. Faster RAM might help, but not by much.
ECC RAM brings you stability and correct operation - ECC means that
the memory can correct single-bit errors (in a 32-bit word, I think)
and reliably detect two-bit errors. Without ECC, if an error happens,
something goes wrong (from an end user seeing 'b' where they expected
'a' to the server crashing without any "good" reason).
Quote:>SO in this hardware novices opinion, the issue is - is the dual 400
>celeron processors feature something worthwhile to an apache server?
The aggregate CPU performance seems to be roughly the same; I don't
know enough to say what the dual-CPU setup makes to memory bandwidth;
my guess is "nothing". But then again, do you have a bottleneck, and
if so, what is it? It is no use comparing CPUs if they can easily
swamp some other part of the system.
Wolf a.k.a. Juha Laiho Espoo, Finland
PS(+) PE Y+ PGP(+) t- 5 !X R !tv b+ !DI D G e+ h---- r+++ y++++
"...cancel my subscription to the resurrection!" (Jim Morrison)