Server replacement

[Busybee989]

Hello,

Very non techie here.

I've just been asked to approve funds for a new server because ours is out of warranty- not broken, just out of warranty.

Would this be the norm? Or should the server we have run till it breaks?

If it was to break would we lose data or just access to the data until the server was repaired?

Thank you all

[strawberry]

It very much depends on what the server does, but if it breaks then yes it may well stop doing what you want it to do. The warranty will likely only cover the hardware components, if you have software issues then you will need another form of support.

[3s-gtech]

If you don't have anyone onsite with the skills to maintain/repair the server in the event of a failure, and if funds allow, replacing the server would be wise. The failure mechanism would determine what happened to your data - if you disks died, data could be lost - but if a PSU popped you'd just have to wait until a replacement came. If the whole thing went up in smoke anything could happen, so you need to make sure you have a robust backup solution in place too.

[DavePa]

I always use the rule of never having live data on an out-of-warranty server. Should the worse happen and the server break it's probably all fixable although depending on the nature of the break it may not be and data loss could occur - and that's never a good thing! Hopefully you have good backups and a regularly tested DR plan although that may not be the case. If it's the only server you have I would be looking to add a new server with a 5 year, 24*7 warranty and a 4hr response and I'd then use the existing server as something non-critical such as a backup server, an print server or anything else I could live without for as long as it took to replace it. Out of warranty does not mean throwaway but be very cautious about using it for anything important

[Sagima]

That depends on what breaks - if it is the raid card or multiple hard drives and you don;t have backups elsewhere then maybe you'll lose something other wise it should be repairable but depending on how old you let it get it might take more time to get whatever part you need or to order a new server and set it up.

 

Depending on what the server does you could buy the new one as a replica of the old one, using the old one as a failover until it actually breaks (you'd need to test it every now and then)

 

We have a rule that is a server can't be turned off during the school day without causing a moderate amount of disruption then it must be in warranty to make sure it is fixed by the end of the next day.

If it would affect the teacher's ability to teach their lessons, the school's ability to pay the staff or access information on the students then it must have a replica/hot standby/be clustered and both must be in warranty (usually with a 2-3 year offset with the second server)

These days most things are virtual so as long as the virtual servers are in warranty we just make sure there's a replica on the other server we can fail over to in case of an emergency.

My Head is opposed to cloud storage of school services so everything is run onsite.

 

Examples of servers that can run without warranty - SCCM, Archive fileserver (old pictures and things that the school insists we keep and make available)

Must be in Warranty - Media Server, Intranet, Backup Servers

Must have a hot backup - SQL, Exchange, DCs, Fileservers, Virtual Servers

[Steve21]

Can always get an extended warranty on the older kit, but wouldn't ever suggest running it without one

 

But in terms of recovery etc, warranty is never a reason not to backup data etc

 

Steve

[gsk]

Can sometimes get an extended warranty on the older kit, but wouldn't ever suggest running it without one

 

But in terms of recovery etc, warranty is never a reason not to backup data etc

 

Steve

 

Fixed - Depending on what server and how old it is would be a big factor.

[maark]

I would have thought most schools should be looking at virtual servers nowadays. If you have spare capacity on other servers and backups or replication of your virtual servers then it is not crucial to have extended warranty. You can bring up the virtual server on a new host until you fix the physical host that has a fault.

Only one of my physical servers is in warranty. You can buy extended warranties but they are expensive - you would be better off putting money towards another physical server and setting up virtual servers.

[Steve21]

Fixed - Depending on what server and how old it is would be a big factor.

 

Personally I'd say always Maybe not direct from original company but always someone, but aye aye I know what you mean

 

Steve

[tmcd35]

I think there are a number of questions that need to be answered first...

 

Is it your only server?

If not, what is its role - what service is it providing?

How old is the existing server?

And how long was it warranty for?

When did the warranty run out - and how much will it cost to extend?

Who's being employed to maintain the network/server/computers on a day to day basis?

And what is their professional advice?

 

 

We regularly run servers out of warranty but...

 

We multiple servers with multiple levels of redundancy between them

Replace hard disks on an annual cycle

Replace servers on a five year cycle

Have a good disaster recovery plan

Have a team on site to deal with problems

 

 

You should never run a server till it breaks. Warranties are debatable, but you should have a regular upgrade replacement strategy for most IT equipment - especially core equipment like servers and switches that everything else relies on.

 

As to the question of what will happen if it breaks - it depends on what services where being offered, the nature of the fault, and quality of the backup/disaster recovery plan. Worse can scenario, yes all data can be lost irrecoverably.

Edited May 5, 2015 by tmcd35

[robjduk]

Maybe the person who requested this had a point. I bought a Dell server packed with RAM and CPU power along with a 5 year warranty for about the price of 5 years of warranty for my older ones. I would make the person requesting it to jump through some hoops and show you some numbers.

[DCUK6]

I think there are a number of questions that need to be answered first...

 

Is it your only server?

If not, what is its role - what service is it providing?

How old is the existing server?

And how long was it warranty for?

When did the warranty run out - and how much will it cost to extend?

Who's being employed to maintain the network/server/computers on a day to day basis?

And what is their professional advice?

 

 

We regularly run servers out of warranty but...

 

We multiple servers with multiple levels of redundancy between them

Replace hard disks on an annual cycle

Replace servers on a five year cycle

Have a good disaster recovery plan

Have a team on site to deal with problems

 

 

You should never run a server till it breaks. Warranties are debatable, but you should have a regular upgrade replacement strategy for most IT equipment - especially core equipment like servers and switches that everything else relies on.

 

As to the question of what will happen if it breaks - it depends on what services where being offered, the nature of the fault, and quality of the backup/disaster recovery plan. Worse can scenario, yes all data can be lost irrecoverably.

 

What he said ^.

 

Servers can last for years, in my old schools we had a old hp rack server, our LEA had it for years and replaced, I then nicked in and used it for our second domain controller and impero server.

Was actually more reliable than the first domain controller and never went down. Still going strong now I believe so must be at least 7 years old.

 

Obviosuly old stuff is more likely to go wrong but if its not important then carry on using it.

[Griff]

My new place is pretty cool replaced servers every 5 years, extended warranties on them all, all the same brand. About to see a couple of 5 year old ones get replaced this summer so looking to keep those as test servers or just to play around with

[maark]

My new place is pretty cool replaced servers every 5 years, extended warranties on them all, all the same brand. About to see a couple of 5 year old ones get replaced this summer so looking to keep those as test servers or just to play around with

 

Isn't that a bit of waste of money if they don't need replacing?

[localzuk]

Isn't that a bit of waste of money if they don't need replacing?

 

After 5 years? They need replacing. Chance of failure after 5 years is significantly higher than a new server. Especially as they'd be out of warranty.

 

I push for replacement when warranty runs out too. Too risky to have something unsupported running all our IT!

[Griff]

Isn't that a bit of waste of money if they don't need replacing?

 

What can say maark money to burn money to burn....joking. 5 years seems about right mate I mean IBM won't give us an extended warranty so if they did I would probably keep them but as localzuk says the risk of unsupported server is far to high especially as we run loads of provisioned machines. I had some servers at my last place nearly 8 years old heart was in my mouth every morning I went in to work really don't like that feeling.