Dell PowerEdge Advice

[1Drisnil]

My company has older Poweredge pedestal servers of the 4100/4200 family. It is obvious that not only is this architecture no longer available but it is currently terribly under powered.

The system was originally designed for use with WINNT, but with a recent migration to Win2K, the need to augment the hardware is a growing concern.

I have suggested we move away from pedestals into rack-mounted servers for consolidation and ROI/TCO.

I am considering 1750 and 26xx poweredge servers. I am also looking into Direct Attached Storage(DAS) array of about 300GB with room to grow as well as an auto-loader tape device along the lines of Exabyte's VXA-2 PacketLoader 1x10.

I have lost touch with how to gauge the equipment needs we have with what is currently available short of following the software manufactures recommendations.

Here's what the current network looks like:

Less than 100 workstations/laptops with no current need of terminal services. Five servers distributed across 2 sites in an AD win2K single domain forest. The IP scheme is private and the services used are: DNS, WINS, DHCP.
All servers have 2 RAID arrays: Mirror for system/boot & RAID 5 for Data except for the ISA box which is just mirrored. Each of the major boxes have 1 internal DDS-4 tape unit in them.

Main site: Site A
Dell PowerEdge 4100 Server Processor - Single, 200 Mhz
Application server

Dell PowerEdge 4200 Server Processor - Single, 300 Mhz
ISA box

Dell PowerEdge 4300 Server Processor - Single, 600 Mhz P3
Root DC - DNS, DHCP, WINS

Dell PowerEdge 4600 Server Processor - Double, 2.4Ghz Xeon.
Exch2k Server

Satellite site: Site B
Dell PowerEdge 2300 Server Processor - Single, 450 Mhz
AD DC w/DHCP, DNS, WINS

Constructive criticism is appreciated.

Thanxs!

"...understanding "The Why" is half the battle!" - Anonymous.

 

[NickFerrar]

Not totally sure what the question is to answer heh but...

1750's make good DC's - I think they come with 512MB RAM minimum these days anyway but if not you should definetly go for 512MB not 256MB.

App and ISA server should have 1GB RAM - whether you go for 1750's or 26xx's really depends on how much internal disk space you need.

A storage array and auto-loader is probably a good idea. Where I work we never really had the budget to set up a proper storage solution so we acquired servers with local storage and backup devices as required - which leaves us now with about 15 servers with DLT's or LTO's and various network backups going on which is a nightmare to manage.

 

[jkupski]

One suggestion/comment: if rackspace isn't a concern, don't go for the 1750s--they end up costing more than an equally configured 2650, and are EXTREMELY loud. They also only support three drives internally, which makes the RAID1/RAID5 scenario you mention above unworkable.

It's also worth knowing that the current dell rackmounts don't support internal tape drives--this isn't really an issue for you since you're looking at an autoloader, but you have that second site to worry about.

Try pricing out the tower servers (2600 4600 6600) against the rackmounts, and see where you end up--all of them can be ordered in a rackmount configuration (though they take up lots of rackspace) and are cooler, quieter, and support an internal tape device should you need one.

 

[1Drisnil]

In a nutshell, my company has an opportunity to fund a complete recreation of its server room, from a home-grown facility to a more robust & proper version.

Once approved, that plan must have the room to accept at least a 15% growth over a 5 year period with the possibility of moving to a more wireless environment.

I am suggesting moving from pedestal server to rack-mounted models as previosuly mentioned. I would like to pull out the RAID 5 arrays and centralize them. I would also like an auto-loader. Previously, the data at the satellite has been pulled across a T1 span and backed up locally at the main site on DDS-4 tape sometimes using a disk-based backup first.

Wireless devices as well as remote solutions need to be considered. Although we do not have a large user base, there are considerable amount of multi-tiered applications running that require a robust platform.

I am also wondering if a migration from W2K to W2K3 should be considered ,if the cost of such a software move is not an issue?

"...understanding "The Why" is half the battle!" - Anonymous.

 

[theScien]

If budget is of concern, tower solutions work out cheaply and can then be relocated later to other departments with no rack space, you can also hook then to a centralised storage solution.

Noise is also a consideration now a days, where I work, we also went for a rack only approach, and my oh my, doing any work in the server room is like being under the runway of a busy airport, no one can stand there for more than 15 minutes at most, tower servers PE 1600's, 2600's, 4600's... are considerable less noisy, in fact I sleep next to a PE1600SC with an array of SCSI's at 10K and I barely notice it.

From the list of your current equipment I would keep the last three and retire the first two boxes, or keep them for developement/installation try outs.

Moving from 2K to 2K3 can be wise but watch out for 95/98 clients if you have them and any current application compatibility issue.

------------------------------

http://www.mylittlehost.com

------------------------------