Prev: Sound Driver Problem (code19). Please Help!
Next: clean install of xp sp3 hangs
From: Rahul on 28 Feb 2010 20:42
=?Utf-8?B?QW5kcmV3IEUu?= <eckrichco(a)msn.com> wrote in news:E2A3842B-9166-
4BC7-8391-A9279393887B(a)microsoft.com:

> 15,000 rpm drives are usually associated with SCSI &/or enterprise
> systems,typically these hd are under 100GB.The smaller the hd the better
> the performance..
>

Do you think it will be better if I run the OS from the fast SAS drive and
store docs on the larger SATA?

--
Rahul
From: Shenan Stanley on 28 Feb 2010 20:50
Rahul wrote:
> The machine is not slow per se. AMD Opteron procs. 2.2 GHz. 8 cores
> total. (Dual socket Quad cores) 16 GB RAM.
>
> Besides, the machine was blazing fast when I was using my 130 Gig
> SAS 15k RPM drive.

You have that hardware and replaced a SAS drive with a SATA?!

Really?!

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


From: Bill Blanton on 28 Feb 2010 21:32
On 2/28/2010 20:42, Rahul wrote:
> =?Utf-8?B?QW5kcmV3IEUu?=<eckrichco(a)msn.com> wrote in news:E2A3842B-9166-
> 4BC7-8391-A9279393887B(a)microsoft.com:
>
>> 15,000 rpm drives are usually associated with SCSI&/or enterprise
>> systems,typically these hd are under 100GB.The smaller the hd the better
>> the performance..
>>
>
> Do you think it will be better if I run the OS from the fast SAS drive and
> store docs on the larger SATA?

I would. I have Windows and all programs installed on a small 10k rpm
IDE drive, and use a couple of larger 7.2k rpm drives for user data. At
one time, I had to run a clone of the system off one of the slower 7200
rpm drives, while the 10k drive was being RMAed, and the performance hit
was very noticeable.

The system will boot and shut down faster. Programs load faster. Paging
file I/O, a major performance consideration, is faster. To a lesser
extent reading/writing to %temp% folders, TIF, log files, etc..it all
adds up..

From: Rahul on 1 Mar 2010 02:20
"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper(a)gmail.com> wrote in news:uHVdcGOuKHA.5036
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

> You have that hardware and replaced a SAS drive with a SATA?!
>
> Really?!

Yes. :( 130 Gigs wasn't enough to accomodate all the accounts that needed
to be on it.

Any smarter way out? I don't see the obvious soultion maybe.

--
Rahul
From: Rahul on 1 Mar 2010 02:22
Bill Blanton <bblanton(a)REMOVEmagicnet.net> wrote in news:eFO81dOuKHA.5036
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

> I would. I have Windows and all programs installed on a small 10k rpm
> IDE drive, and use a couple of larger 7.2k rpm drives for user data. At
> one time, I had to run a clone of the system off one of the slower 7200
> rpm drives, while the 10k drive was being RMAed, and the performance hit
> was very noticeable.
>

Maybe I will do that then! Is there a way during the install that I could
tell the system to move the user storage to the SATA drive? Or is that just
moving MyDocs?

--
Rahul
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Sound Driver Problem (code19). Please Help!
Next: clean install of xp sp3 hangs