Buying a server...Recommendations?

[davidmulcair]

Here's what I'm looking at:

Dell PowerEdge 2600 2.4 GHz
512 MB RAM

Probably win2k w/40-50 CAL (~$2598 sound right???)

Here's my dilemma:

Number 1:
Two mirrored 73GB 10k rpm's RAID 1 for OS & data

Number 2:
Two mirrored 18GB 10k's RAID 1 for OS
Three 73GB 10k's RAID 5 for data

What should I go with? We have 40 - 50 users, and are currently running a 800mhz 128MB RAM NT 4.0 server, it is working fine except for quickly running out of space. Also, should I go with 15k rpm drives? This is all getting very expensive.

Thanks for any input/links that can help me make the decision.

David

 

[mattjurado]

What kind of applications are you running? If you have a lot of intensive I/O writing, you'll definitely want scenario number 2, with 15k RPM drives.

If you're talking just some word processing and maybe an accounting package or production software, RAID5 seems a bit pricy to fit that need (and do you really need that much data storage). You're really a small business. I'd just mirror the OS, and have one or two 80gb drives as a separate volume for data storage. And for the RPMs, just make sure they're a good SCSI brand, and stick with the 10k RPM drives.

Matt

 

[mattjurado]

Oh yeah, don't forget a good SCSI tape drive, if you are doing tape backups.

Matt

 

[davidmulcair]

Yes, mainly Word and Excel. Large files, but far from intensive data movement. Have already looked at 40/80 tape drive.

If I take the RAID 1 drives and partition them with say... 10GB OS partition and 63GB data partition would this be a potential problem?

 

[mattjurado]

You can do it, but its always a good idea to put the OS on one drive, and data on another. This way, if the OS drive fails, you can replace it, and have your data volume intacts. If its on the same drive, then you have to redo the OS, and rebuild data from tape.

If you can get a couple of 20 or 30gb SCSI drives (1 for the os, 1 to mirror it), that's the way to go. Then, just add in another 80gb drive for storage, back it up, and you're all set.

Matt

 

[bluewhaleCA]

I can't tell from your post if you are considering other options: IF so I would suggest NON Dell. The primary company I work for has either had me build systems or purchased Dells for the past 8 years. Dells are going down hill fast, especially support. I'm not having a hard time convincing clients to go to IBM, even though they initially cost more.
Dell was really good for years, but the past half year especially they have just lost it. And many customers. ( Ed Foster has writtend a 'Gripe' column in Infoworld for years... he now has a web site for this, and Dell has advanced to #4 on it.

http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/2003/5/8/113148/9404

)



Regards

Paul

 

[ricpinto]

Option 2 is the best option . . but if it's pricey for you then what's your current hardware configuration and from there we'll advise you how to upgrade them. I've got the impression that maybe it's not yet time for you to change your server. Although IBM is good, I still prefer Compaq(HP) but that's all I can say coz people will disagree with me .

 

[ABOzIT]

I must disagree with bluewhaleCA on Dell.

I've got 5 Dell PowerEdge servers (2400, 4300, 4400, 2 X 2500) and I have found them to be extremely reliable. I also have no issues with support since the move to India. They are helpful and they always have someone onsite within our 4 hour response time.