[rescue] compare E250 and Ultra 2

[Patrick Giagnocavo +1.717.201.3366]

On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 10:26:03AM -0500, Paul Phillips wrote:
> I notice that Ultra2s can be found at relatively reasonable prices, while 
> E250s seem much more expensive.
> 
> Would similarly configured E250 and Ultra 2 perform equally well for my 
> intended use?  If so, why are the E250s so expensive, other than their 
> expandability?

I think an E250 would probably be overkill unless you are planning to
use more than 2mbps of Internet bandwidth on a continuous basis.
Servlets are a little slow but an Ultra2 should be able to handle a
great deal.  If serving just static files (no dynamic page generation)
you can saturate a T1 with just about anything.
 
> PS - I already have one Ultra 2 dual 300 that has a different task 
> (development machine).  In a (not particularly scientific) test, I notice 
> that my G4 with a single 533 mhz processor starts up Tomcat almost twice as 
> fast as does the Ultra 2 dual 300...

Are the disks roughly equal in terms of performance?

Cordially
-- 
+--------------------------------------------------+
| Patrick Giagnocavo, patrick at zill.net             |
| Zill.Net - OpenACS, Postgres, Python hosting     |
| OpenACS v4 shared server       $39.99/month      |
| Colocation w/30GB transfer     $99.00/month      |
| Managed servers (incl. system) $175/month        |
+--------------------------------------------------+