Licensing question re: 2012 R2 Essentials and IIS
-
@creayt said:
I don't think you can make a single SSD push 4.5 giggers a sec on a *Nix OS, so my raw performance would be much worse.
Where is Windows getting that performance from that UNIX doesn't have?
-
-
@creayt said:
@Dashrender said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@creayt said:
w/ the exception of me over remote desktop to set it up and monitor.
Window Server includes two Administrative User CALs so you'd be good there.
Sure, but if he connects an internal (home) web browser, he needs a CAL for that - most likely.
It looks like 2012 R2 Essentials doesn't use CALs at all, it just has an upper limit after which you need to switch to Standard. See my earlier post for details.
Yes, it has a user cap.
-
@mlnews said:
@creayt said:
I don't think you can make a single SSD push 4.5 giggers a sec on a *Nix OS, so my raw performance would be much worse.
Where is Windows getting that performance from that UNIX doesn't have?
Samsung's Rapid Mode on any 840/850 SSD. It turns the system's RAM into a write back cache and this box has 32GB and gets this performance:
-
@creayt said:
@Dashrender said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@creayt said:
w/ the exception of me over remote desktop to set it up and monitor.
Window Server includes two Administrative User CALs so you'd be good there.
Sure, but if he connects an internal (home) web browser, he needs a CAL for that - most likely.
It looks like 2012 R2 Essentials doesn't use CALs at all, it just has an upper limit after which you need to switch to Standard. See my earlier post for details.
Ah, didn't catch that it was essentials.
-
-
@creayt said:
It's kind of depressing, because TEN 850 Pros in a Raid 10 only put up these numbers:
Yeah but those 10 did it without sucking up any RAM and without risk of data loss from a power event. Credit where it's due and all that.
-
@MattSpeller said:
@creayt said:
It's kind of depressing, because TEN 850 Pros in a Raid 10 only put up these numbers:
Yeah but those 10 did it without sucking up any RAM and without risk of data loss from a power event. Credit where it's due and all that.
Voice of reason. That makes me feel slightly better
-
@MattSpeller said:
Yeah but
Although the Raid 10 SSDs cost $5,000 and the T110 that's putting up better numbers' 850 Pro cost about $140, so now I feel bitter again
-
@creayt at least account for the rest of it lol - add the cost of the RAID controller to the 10 and RAM to the single
-
@MattSpeller said:
@creayt at least account for the rest of it lol - add the cost of the RAID controller to the 10 and RAM to the single
I'm not sure that helps hahaha. The server was a Dell refub and I think w/ a 40% off coupon still chimed in at about $7k pre-SSDs, so $12k versus about $1250 for the t110 SSD included. But, the Raid one is in a datacenter and has two octacores w/ 256GB of RAM and can probably handle exponentially more users, so I'll keep telling myself that
-
@MattSpeller said:
@creayt at least account for the rest of it lol - add the cost of the RAID controller to the 10 and RAM to the single
What's going to be epic is when Samsung releases firmware and software updates and adds support for Rapid Mode across a software RAID of their SSDs and supports infinite cores, that'll be a game changer. It maxes out at one drive and something like 8GB of used RAM at this point I think.
-
@creayt that would be very interesting! Have they announced any plans etc for that?
-
@creayt said:
@mlnews said:
@creayt said:
I don't think you can make a single SSD push 4.5 giggers a sec on a *Nix OS, so my raw performance would be much worse.
Where is Windows getting that performance from that UNIX doesn't have?
Samsung's Rapid Mode on any 840/850 SSD. It turns the system's RAM into a write back cache and this box has 32GB and gets this performance:
That mode is only needed on Windows because Windows doesn't do that natively. UNIX does that without special software. If something has "better performance on Windows" that should be a red flag that something is being missed. UNIX is used for the highest performance, most demanding environments. Outside of video gaming, it should be really shocking to find any UNIX system that doesn't keep up or crush Windows in performance.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
That mode is only needed on Windows because Windows doesn't do that natively. UNIX does that without special software. If something has "better performance on Windows" that should be a red flag that something is being missed. UNIX is used for the highest performance, most demanding environments. Outside of video gaming, it should be really shocking to find any UNIX system that doesn't keep up or crush Windows in performance.
We're talking about Samsung's Rapid Mode software layer, it's not part of Windows. It's written for and only supported on Windows, because that's their market. If you're saying there's a Unix-available equivalent, what's it called and what kind of numbers can it get out of a single SSD?
As far as I know there's no way to get anywhere near that ballpark of performance even on Unix, OS X, or Linux at the moment at least.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
UNIX does that without special software.
Wait, so are you saying that Unix, by itself, uses all available system RAM as a write back cache for all applications blindly?
-
@creayt said:
We're talking about Samsung's Rapid Mode software layer, it's not part of Windows. It's written for and only supported on Windows, because that's their market. If you're saying there's a Unix-available equivalent, what's it called and what kind of numbers can it get out of a single SSD?
I know, that's what I was explaining. Samsung is making third party code to bring into Windows something that every major competitor has natively. It's not called anything, it's just how UNIX works
It's just the ram cache.And it can get whatever you can get out of memory performance. It's a RAM cache.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@creayt said:
We're talking about Samsung's Rapid Mode software layer, it's not part of Windows. It's written for and only supported on Windows, because that's their market. If you're saying there's a Unix-available equivalent, what's it called and what kind of numbers can it get out of a single SSD?
I know, that's what I was explaining. Samsung is making third party code to bring into Windows something that every major competitor has natively. It's not called anything, it's just how UNIX works
It's just the ram cache.And it can get whatever you can get out of memory performance. It's a RAM cache.
Wow, thanks. I'm about to Google my ass off. Does that mean that Unix in general is more likely to lose data in the event of power loss than Windows?
-
@creayt said:
Wow, thanks. I'm about to Google my ass off. Does that mean that Unix in general is more likely to lose data in the event of power loss?
Yes, because UNIX is mostly designed for enterprise class gear where power loss is something you are supposed to protect from the outside. UNIX has enterprise software RAID too, same issues. But it is configurable, so not a real issue.
Oracle makes a big point of this.... instead of building power protection inside the chassis like hardware RAID does, they expect you to put that outside the chassis.
