Macola Server Hardware

[HKNinja]

Hi guys,

I am wondering what server are most of you using with what kind of workload. I'm purchasing a Dell PowerEdge 830 Server (Dual-Core Pentium D 3.2GHz, 2GB RAM, 15k SCSI hdd, etc) for our upgrade project from P-SQL (currently running on a HP P3 1GHz server) to MS-SQL. We're in a 25-user environment. Although Dell's website only recommend PowerEdge 830 for up to 10-user environment, I think it's just their way to make you buy more expensive server (i.e. Xeon or Xeon Dual-core, which are ~$1500 - $2000 more). I want to get a bit more assurance and opinion from you guys. Let me know what are you using based on the following factors:
- Processor type and speed
- RAM
- Users
- Macola version
Thanks!

 

[abaldwin]

Me 50 user site of macola.

HP Proliant dl380 dual xeon (Quad ready)
3.2 GHz 2GB ram 2 drives mirrored for OS and log files....3 drive raid 5 with one spare for data.

I would think that your 830 will be sufficient for Macola but I would think you might want to spend the 1500 or so for the dual xeon and some hd space here is why.

I think you will find that you may want to be moving some of your other applications to SQL based especially if they interact with macola data at all. Management and reporting are just easier and faster. We run at least 15 other databases on the Macola server above with absolutely no problems.

The important thing is the drive configuration and the hard drive space to institute online backups, transaction log backups, and redundancy. Don't scrimp on the hard drive space.



Andy Baldwin

"Testing is the most overlooked programming language on the books!

 

[HKNinja]

Hey Abaldwin,

Thanks for the reply.

In comparison, we're running on a much smaller network. With 25 - 30 users, we only use Macola 7.6 as our ERP database. We don't have any other database or apps attached to it other than UPS WorldShip. We're currently using a HP Proliant P3 1.0Ghz 1GB RAM RAID-5 server (with 146GB of total effective space) and is providing enough bandwidth most of the time (lag when big reports are being run.) Storage wise, we run everything (AD, file, print, db, etc) on this one single server and still have ~15GB of free space left. The new PowerEdge 830 RAID-5 server, which house 3 73GB 15k rpm HDDs, will be dedicated for Macola only, and we'll buy one more PowerEdge 830 that is dedicated for MS Exchange. By spreading the tasks to multiple servers, I think we should have enough juice for what we want plus more.

What bothers me is how Dell rated their servers. According to their rating, the PowerEdge 830 is suitable for up to 10 users environment, which I think is totally BS.

 

[HKNinja]

Btw, Abaldwin,

Which version of Macola are you running. According to Exact's tech, our version 7.6.x will not be taking advantage of multi-core and 64-bit processors.

 

[NEmacGuy]

The best performance I have seen has been on a Dell
PowerEdge 2600.
Main Macola Server install date 2/27/03:
2 gig of Ram dual 2.8 Xeon processors, 2 15k drives in a raid 1 and 4 15k drives in a Raid 5. Windows 2000sp4 SBS with only SQL installed, SQL200sp3a. They are running Macola 7.6.300c.

Terminal Server:
They also have a like kind server with 2gig Ram, a 3gig Xeon, 2 15k in a raid 1.

They have 15 local users, and remote plant running on the terminal server. Under full load, they never peak 20% cpu usage. I do think we need to add Ram on the main server or limmit how much SQL uses, as I writing this the system is currently running at 3.5gig 1.5gig for SQL of ram so they are in a swap state.

We have bigger systems setup at other clients, for example one server as a file server with the program, and one with SQL, with bigger processors, and bigger ram, but they can't touch this clients performance. I would highly recommend more that 3 drives in your raid 5, and have your logs on a seperate array.

One more thing the client got a gigabit switch thrown in when they bought their servers. (I don't like advertising for dell - we are a HP reseller, I just think this config work well and could be duplicated with an other mfg. I would expect you should get even better performance now as this has been in place for three years.)

 

[dbjunkie]

We have been using a Dell 2650 for about 3 1/2 years, so far no problems.
Dual 2.4 Ghz Xeon
2GB RAM
RAID 1(36GB)/RAID 5(72GB)
30 Users
Version 7.6.300B

This is a dedicated SQL server, Progression is on a different box. My only regret was not making the disk array larger. Our live company DB is around 15GB and with the way the transaction logs grow and shrink (written to the RAID 1 array) I have to keep an eye on it.

 

[kstickler]

Ditto here, We've been on a similar Dell 2650 for 3 years. We have around 60 users if you count our WMS terminals. We also utilize two terminal servers. Our company file is at 11GB so I can relate to the disk drive space issues that dbjunkie refers to. We are actually planning to replace the unit this year, #1 because the service contract is up (although I can renew it) and #2 due to disk space and online backup requirements.

Drive space is cheap so buy all that you can! Same goes for memory. You will get extended use out of any server if it has plenty of both.

 

[randva]

HKNinja:

We have about 20 users. Macola 7.5.102e, Pervasive SQL.
We still run NT4.0 on an old P3 server. 1 GB ram. 36GB mirrored hard drives (about 1/2 full with Macola database)

I let nothing else run on the server. We have acceptable performance.

 

[HKNinja]

Thanks for all the reply, guys. Other than randva, everyone else is running on Xeon processors. No one here really runs Macola on Pentium D 840 (3.2GB Dual-Core) yet. I wonder how that will run on the new Pentium D 840 dual-core processor, which is what I'm ordering. I would prefer AMD dual-core, which has superior performance over Intel plus is 64-bit processor, but it's not as widely available as the Pentium D.

One question, don't you guys think that Xeon (single or dual-core) is an over kill for a 25 concurrent users environment (no remote user, all local and local backups)? I would see a need for Xeon with 50+ users environment with maybe multiple DBs, but for 25 users and single DB, I personally feel that Pentium D 3.2GB is adequate. As technology is moving fast, it'd be obsoleted before you'd consider to upgrade the server hardware. Our HP Proliant is a dual 1GHz P3 processor server with a signal processor installed. I expended the memory from 512MB to 1GB and don't even want to waste money to buy another 1GHz CPU for it. That makes me feel that why we want to waste money buying a dual-processor server w/ single processor in the first place. I predict the PowerEdge 830 Dual-Core servers should last us minimum 5 years before next major upgrade. What do you guys think?

As HDD space goes, I wonder why Kimmary is having space issue since your live DB is only 11GB (our is 10GB, plus a couple of test DB so total about 30GB) and you probably have a HDD array that's over 100GB? Have anybody tried or using SATA RAID-5 array instead of SCSI? That'd be a much cost efficient setup with a high-end SATA RAID-5 Controller. 250GB 7.2k rpm SATA HDD is still cheaper than a 73GB 10k rpm SCSI HDD.

NEMacGuy, does the gigabit switch makes a big different on Macola's performance? I'm still trying to find out whether Macola's processes run on the server or the client PC.

 

[dbjunkie]

HKNinja:

It's not the MDF file that is the issue. That stays relatively static, it's your transaction log file thats is always growing and shrinking. For example our MDF file writes to our RAID 5(72GB) array where as our tranaction log LDF file is stored on the RAID 1(36GB) array. The LDF file can vary each week between 3-4GB and 11-12GB. Plus our online SQL backups are being written to the same array before being copied to tape. As you can see it can quickly chew up major amounts of disk space on that array.

 

[HKNinja]

Hi dbjunkie,

Thanks for the explaination. I see what you're saying now.

 

[MacolaHelp]

Almost everyone I have that converted to sql made the mistake of skimping on hard drive space initially & came to regret it when they discovered there was so much disk space chewed up by sql trx log backups that they were always running out of space unless they only kept a day or two of sql backups (can you say rolling the dice?). Put as many & as large hard drives as you can in the server initially. Far too many problems trying to add them later: sizes change, specs can be slightly different, etc.

My philosophy is throw as much hardware as you can afford intially & run it until it dies. I've seen more "hardware upgrades" to existing systems create more problems than clients can afford. The more "white box" the system, the greater the problem. HP/Compaq/IBM etc have better track records on this. Dell is getting there & their service is pretty good if you buy a lot of stuff from them.

Macola will eventually try to take advantage of any improvements in server/client OS or hardware, database software, microsoft tool set, etc. If you are running the latest and greatest you may not see a difference today, but when they make a change in the development strategy, you will benefit from your foresight.