Components for Oracle (spatial) and ArcGIS build

jerrardo

Junior Member
Jun 23, 2008
2
0
0
Hi all,

I'm trying to put together a computer that will run Oracle (spatial) and ArcGIS. I'm under the impression that hard drive performance is important for Oracle and will benefit overall performance. The minimum system requirements aren't much help. I will be working on files that are 10's of MB in size and sometimes a few hundredd MB. I already have a monitor, and I don't think the video card is important. The other program is ArcGIS and it has some interesting limitations....

- Does not run on 64bit OS
- Does not use more the one core.

So my plan is to focus on a fast dual-core cpu, 4GB of ram, and some fast hard drives.

CPU: Intel E8500
RAM: 4GB Generic DDR2 667
Hard Drives:
1. 73GB 15k RPM SAS drive for OS and programs
2. 300GB 15k RPM SAS drive for data
3. 300GB 15k RPM SAS drive for data
Video Card: 256MB generic workstation card with dual dvi output
Sound Card: Onboard

Is it worth it to go up to quad-core for Oracle? I don't know exactly what I'll be doing with Oracle since I've never used it before! I could drop the SAS drives and go with a 10k SATA boot drive and a 1TB storage drive so that I could fit a fast quad-core in the budget.

Second, I think 600GB of storage might be cutting it close. If I need more storage I will have to switch to SATA. Is it worth doing a Raid Array to get some of the speed back? I'm guessing I would use the software RAID that comes with the motherboard. I can do any RAID and have access to a server for backups, but can't decide what combination would be best. I was thinking either 3-4 large (320GB or 500GB) disks in a raid 5 with everything on it, or doing a 160 10k RPM SATA disk for the OS and programs and then 2-3 large disks in AID 0.

This is for work and there will be NO overclocking. I know, I know :(

 
Jun 9, 2008
29
0
0
I'd surely prefer to use Raid as both apps most likely will rely HEAVY on I/O thus your best bet for top performance is raid array. I'd rather invest in good hardware based adapter $350+ from Areca/AMCC/LSI (PCIe x4 preferably ) and more less expensive drives (Sata will do). I'd use 2x 74Gb 10k RPM in Raid 1 for OS and programs and 4x 500Gb (or 750Gb) 7.2k drives in Raid 10 (or 5 If you need extra storage and ready to sacrifice some performance)

1Tb Raw space with 500gb in raid 10, 1.5gb raw in raid 5
1.5tb -||- with 750 and 2.2Gb in raid 5

Depends on your usage of database your CPU needs might be very low - for storing and serving data or very high then running multiple queries, data manipulation etc....

Btw: If this machine is built for work, why don't you just spec out pre-built server like HP DL380 G5 ??
 

jerrardo

Junior Member
Jun 23, 2008
2
0
0
Hey Bored SysAdmin, thanks for the input! I don't know all the details as I just got the job last week. I do know that they just got a 24TB server for hosting all of the data and web services (I couldn't tell you anything about the processing power though). So this is more of a workstation build, and my guess is the most taxing thing I will do on my computer is process large high-resolution satellite image files. I am guessing that I will use oracle to manage the data and create web apps, but then again I'm a total Oracle noob. I'm definitely leaning more towards the multiple queries/ data manipulation build.

I guess I should have mentioned my budget in the original post. I've got $2,500 to play with, not including monitors, and I'm fairly certain I have to order from a major vendor like Dell or HP. I was thinking of skipping raid 1, except for maybe the OS and programs, and going raid 0 to save money. I figure I'll have access to the server for regular backups and it shouldn't be a big deal, but then maybe I'm just playing with fire. When I get into the configurations with a hardware raid adapter option I am already at my budget before I even upgrade from 1GB of RAM or add a second hard drive. I think I'm stuck with either either onboard raid, or the SAS hard drives. I tried to look through the charts below comparing enterprise and desktop hard drives to see how much better 15k rpm hard drives where, and then I was going to try to figure out how much a RAID array would help the 7.2k rpm disk, but it all got too confusing. I guess the question is ... "is it better to go with a couple of individual 15k drives, or a couple of 7.2k drives in a raid 0 array using the onboard controller?".

Enterprise
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch...8%2C1995%2C1982%2C1997

Desktop
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch...6%2C1796%2C1842%2C1795
 
Jun 9, 2008
29
0
0
Oh, I didn't realized it's was a more like dev workstation build and than you are on the budget..
hmm..
In this case making OS installed on raid 1 doesn't much sense....
I'd say try Lenovo D10 workstation with below customizations:

Xeon Quad E5430 [2.66Ghz] [Your Oracle will thank you :) ]
4Gb ecc ddr2 2x dimms
hard drive config : 4 in raid 10
4x 500Gb Sata 7200 rpm = 1Tb usable raw (minus file system = 920-930Gb net)
plus DVd-rom, keyb & mouse
= $2500

Alternatively: raid 5 with 3x 750Tb = 1.5tb but you loose some i/o performance

On higher budget more advanced and faster hard drive configs could be possible...