|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
If you are referring to Seagate's Ultra2 SCSI, it seems to have a 1 MB buffer as
opposed to 512K for regular Ultra-wide SCSI. I would think that would help
quite a bit, plus the faster transfer rate - 80 MB/sec. burst speed as opposed
to 40/MB sec. for Ultra-wide SCSI. As usual the Cheetah is a top performer,
but maybe a little noisy for some.
It seems both TS 4 and Global Server are heavily dependent on disk speed rather
than the CPU, so it would seem upgrading a hard drive should have a significant
effect on performance than upgrading a processor. I'll bet your CPU typically
runs at 5% or less for the applications you are running.
I got 2716 ticks for DSP9M off BMI cable, so your tick count seems very good.
Speed in TS 4, and to a lesser extent TS 2000, is greatly dependent on how many
symbols you collect.
--- Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: stuart <stuart@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: James F. Mazzulla <tagteam@xxxxxxx>
Cc: allank@xxxxxxxx <allank@xxxxxxxx>; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
<omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 7:21 PM
Subject: Re: Dual Processors ?
>In regards to hardware, does anyone know how much the new ultra-wide,
>ultra-fast scuzzi's improve performance? I have a P-2 450 with a 10,000 rpm 9
>gig Seagate Cheetah with Adaptec's fastest scuzzi, and it seems that TS 4.0
>runs all my programs well. I have Advanced Get RT running as well as TS 4.0
>I have at least nine charts running in AGet and 5 windows in TS with several
>charts in each window with dual monitors through Win 98 with no delay. I use
>BMI sat, and as a means of comparison with posts previously, I got 3722 ticks
>on DSP9M today (3/30).
>
>Midnight updates through BMI take about 10 minutes to stop working the hard
>drive. It seemed to take about as long with my former 200 mghz with similar
>scuzzi. I only run 190 symbols, but I store 5,000 days of each, including
>all tick data. Would I see the hard drive work less with dual processors,
>dual HD scuzzi's, in RAID array, or is the advantage mostly in backup on the
>second drive?
>
>SB
>
>"James F. Mazzulla" wrote:
>
>> Allan K. wrote:
>> >.....if you're running, say, TS4, Excel and a browser at the
>> >same time, multiple processors will be kept balanced. You will see a very
>> >definite improvement in performance.....
>>
>> I don't know. I've run all of the above (and more) on two machines
>> which are identical in all respects =except= for an extra 300MHz PII
>> processor. The improvement in performance thus far has been pretty
>> marginal, from what I can determine.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jim
>
|