Server costs?

[Sonic007]

So I'm going to be replacing our ageing servers. We have two, one at each of our schools. Juniors and Infants.

Both sites are linked.

 

Having lots of users using both sites I have decided to ditch the two networks and instead create one network.

 

I'm looking at a new Dell server that will run Server 2019 Standard, using the two included HyperV licenses to run virtual Domain controller and Juniors Sims server.

I'll then need another virtual server running the Infants Sims. (Do I need another copy of Win Server 2019 or only additional license?)

 

Im looking at about 64GB Ram.

 

We have about 100 devices so Im assuming Im going to need CALS.

 

Im getting quotes but could someone give me an idea of what prices Im looking at?

 

Many thanks.

[DSapseid]

If you go for Data Center licences you can have unlimited VM's.

 

You could go for 2 servers still as part of the same cluster so you have a bit of resilience if one goes down.

[mikkydoos]

It all depends on spec but.....

 

2 hypervisors - Dells are pretty good. You need enough CPU cores, RAM and disk space for all your VM's (twice).... Maybe £8K for both obviously depending on spec.

 

Switches / network hardware ? £ Depends on spec and requirements.

 

Look at your Microsoft volume licensing for your clients, CALs, Office, Windows licences - You'll need a licence for each hypervisor and each VM running Windows... plus your CALs - call an MS licensing vendor for comparisons to your quotes.

 

Backup solution such as Veeam for backing up VM's - Ours was about 2K first year then £ 600-700 per year for support.

 

 

10-12K all in ???

[chazzy2501]

purchase the servers and storage with a 5 year warranty, then you can price it out as an annual cost over 5 years. (it looks far more reasonable that way.)

[Sonic007]

If you go for Data Center licences you can have unlimited VM's.

 

You could go for 2 servers still as part of the same cluster so you have a bit of resilience if one goes down.

 

Cost is very much an issue so Im going for the one server. VM's will mean I can quickly bring them back up if needed.

 

It is the CALs that Im wondering about and how much that will influence the cost.

 

I have cloud backup sollutions already in place and all hardware /switches, etc already setup.

[mikkydoos]

Cost is very much an issue so Im going for the one server. VM's will mean I can quickly bring them back up if needed.

 

It is the CALs that Im wondering about and how much that will influence the cost.

 

I have cloud backup sollutions already in place and all hardware /switches, etc already setup.

 

 

Your MS volume licensing will cover CALs.

 

Have you got EES licensing ??

[PotNoodleTech]

If cost is an issue, as it is in most schools then buy refurbished hardware from a reputable refurbish supplier, ICT Direct, HardwareAssociates, ITinStock.

 

I buy dell servers, PCs and Laptops refurbished. I'll never buy new again. The only things I buy new now are chromebooks as there isn't really a second hand market for those [yet]

Edited November 30, 2018 by PotNoodleTech

[dhicks]

Im getting quotes but could someone give me an idea of what prices Im looking at?

 

We've looked at Stone's "Equinox" product, basically two servers set up with Server 2016 and Storage Spaces with all the required hardware and settings to handle failover and get nice, fast disk performance via tiered storage. I think the hardware and setup cost (based on around 20TB of available storage and 128GB of RAM to run VMs) was around £19,000 (price includes VAT), with around £10,000 per year for their fully-managed support package. That's possibly more expensive than buying some servers and setting them up, but you do save on your time on the setup and maintenance - I figure I'm easily spending £10,000 worth of the school's time working on server-related issues.

[supportman]

2 x Dell R330's + Windows 2019 Standard edition assuming you have EES already would be less than 2.5k probably.

Maybe throw in a couple of aftermarket SSD drives pushes the price up a bit but cheaper that buying from Dell.

Edited November 30, 2018 by supportman

[speckytecky]

Perhaps consider switching from terrestrial to Hosted SIMS saves a heap of hassle and adds a lot of flexibility.

[jmak]

One network sounds like a good plan, but I don't think many people would choose to reduce to a single physical server.

 

Licensing really isn't expensive (use EES even if you don't use it for anything else) and it doesn't make any difference whether the VMs are on one server or split. Each standard licence allows you two "operating system environments" on a single box. This means that if you install it as a physical with multiple roles, you can also have a single VM or you can install it as a hypervisor and run two VMs. One more licence would allow you another 2 VMs.

I last got quotes before the price changes, but a standard licence was around the £60 mark. Data centre was about three times the price, so unless you want more than six VMs on a box, stick with Standard licenses.

 

Given the choice, personally I'd pick two refurb servers over a single new one, a separate broadband feed to each site and a resilient link between them. Apart from maintenance of the hypervisor (which should be minimal) there's no more work maintaining the VMs whether they're all on one box or split across several.

[mavhc]

Does depend on the rest of your setup, how both sites get internet, how are they linked, what licensing scheme you have currently.

 

I don't see where it's stated you can install Windows Server as a hypervisor and still have 2 VMs. Maybe you mean using the free Windows Hyper V Server, I use that a) because it's free, and b) because hypervisor should be as simple as possible, a full Windows Server is way too complex and needs more updates and rebooting.

 

Hyperoo seems like a good free-ish backup system for hyper-v servers.

 

Keep your old servers as backups and temp VM hosts

[jmak]

Does depend on the rest of your setup, how both sites get internet, how are they linked, what licensing scheme you have currently.

 

I don't see where it's stated you can install Windows Server as a hypervisor and still have 2 VMs.

 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/D/4/3D42BDC2-6725-4B29-B75A-A5B04179958B/WindowsServer2016VirtualTech_VLBrief.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjBzZ_dhP_eAhWOUBUIHfgEB6oQFjAMegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2MAuoRl1OedUkmHupjF1OX

 

 

 

Licensing Windows Server for use as a host and guest OS

 

Windows Server licensing permits use of the software in both the physical OSE (an instance of the software serving as

the host operating system (or OS) in the case of a virtualized server) and virtual OSEs (instances of the software running as guest OS’s).

If Windows Server is deployed on a server is running a hypervisor on bare metal (directly on top of the server hardware), such as VMware’s ESX/ESXi, then Windows Server will not be deployed as a host OS in

the physical OSE. However, the guest OS instances deployed and running in virtual OSEs on the server still must be appropriately licensed. This means licenses must be assigned to the server for all the physical cores on the server (subject to a minimum of eight per processor and 16 per server).

Standard edition will allow up to two instances on each fully licensed server (plus a third instance in the physical OSE, if it is used solely to host and manage virtual OSEs) and Datacenter edition will allow an unlimited number of instances on each fully licensed server. (The right to run an

instance of Windows Server in the physical OSE is not relevant in the case of ESX/ESXi hosting the virtualization layer.)

If you assign enough Windows Server Standard core licenses to fully re-license the server running ESX/ESXi as the

host OS, then you may run up to four virtual instances of Windows Server Standard at a time. You may not run a fifth virtual instance (e.g., in place of an instance in the physical OSE). You could, however, run a fifth instance of Windows Server, in lieu of ESX/ESXi, as the host OS (a physical instance on top of the server hardware), solely for purposes of managing your virtualization workload.

 

(My bold)

 

FWIW I have mine set up with the core edition for both the reasons you stated and also because it was the only free option when I virtualized, but I'm aware it changed and some people prefer it because you get the GUI.

 

Edit: From the same document, I learned that you if you want to fail over to a different host, you don't need to license it on both hosts as long as you only run the load on one server at a time.

Edited December 1, 2018 by jmak

[mavhc]

Interesting, they didn't mention that in the other doc I was reading, the one where it says "for every Windows VM you want to add you have to licence all the cores on the physical server again", that's some evil maths.

 

Do people tend to assign 16 vCPUs to every guest OS, or divide them among the actual physical cores? 4 for this VM, 2 for that, etc.

[Sonic007]

Perhaps consider switching from terrestrial to Hosted SIMS saves a heap of hassle and adds a lot of flexibility.

 

That would never work here. We have two seperate Sims servers and 2 seperate FMS too.

The costs are way too expensive when you factor in our amount of users too.

[matt40k]

That would never work here. We have two seperate Sims servers and 2 seperate FMS too.

The costs are way too expensive when you factor in our amount of users too.

It still might be worth doing separate costing for with and without SIMS\FMS. If nothing else it confirms your onprem solution is better value for money.

[Sonic007]

One network sounds like a good plan, but I don't think many people would choose to reduce to a single physical server.

 

The reasoing behind this isnt just cost. It is more to do with all servers being virtual.

They could just be restored at any time from backups.

 

In the event the physical host did go down permanently, I could create a new host pretty quickly until we got a new server and then restore all VM's.

[ICTDirect_Dave]

+1 For refurbished! (I have to say that I know) but you can get much more for your money, and should be able to buy a matching pair for failover and still save money.

 

I've got some cracking Dell R720's in stock right now. Warranties from 2-5 years too

[Sonic007]

Does depend on the rest of your setup, how both sites get internet, how are they linked, what licensing scheme you have currently.

Keep your old servers as backups and temp VM hosts

 

 

Sounds like a good plan keeping an old server.

 

Both sites are currenly linked via switch and fibre accross from one site to the other.

 

They are currently on seperate networks and only share the Internet connection. Router has the two ports configured for each nerwork.

[mikkydoos]

Interesting, they didn't mention that in the other doc I was reading, the one where it says "for every Windows VM you want to add you have to licence all the cores on the physical server again", that's some evil maths.

 

Do people tend to assign 16 vCPUs to every guest OS, or divide them among the actual physical cores? 4 for this VM, 2 for that, etc.

 

 

Never. That is a recipe for appalling cpu bottlenecking and terrible performance.

[Sonic007]

+1 For refurbished! (I have to say that I know) but you can get much more for your money, and should be able to buy a matching pair for failover and still save money.

 

I've got some cracking Dell R720's in stock right now. Warranties from 2-5 years too

 

 

I was looking at Dell T640's with an additional processor. What sort of price woul dI be looking at for something like that with about 64GB or more RAM, 2 1TB Hardrives, Windows server which would give me two free HyperV servers and then an additional license for another VM?

 

Thankyou.

[ICTDirect_Dave]

I was looking at Dell T640's with an additional processor. What sort of price would I be looking at for something like that with about 64GB or more RAM, 2 1TB Hardrives, Windows server which would give me two free HyperV servers and then an additional license for another VM?

 

Thankyou.

 

Just done a quick calculation for you on an R720XD 2U you get the following spec for £1,120.

 

2 x Xeon E5-2670 2.60GHz 8 Core (16 thread) CPU

96GB RAM (12 x 8GB)

2 x 900GB SAS HDD (leaving 24 x 2.5" Drive bays available for additional drives)

Quad Port Gigabit RJ45 Nic

2 x 750W platinum PSU

Rack Rails

2 Years Warranty

 

They'd be a decent server in any circumstances

 

We can't offer licensing on a per-unit basis however, all we can do is quote you for an an EES subscription fo the whole school.

[PotNoodleTech]

We've looked at Stone's "Equinox" product, basically two servers set up with Server 2016 and Storage Spaces with all the required hardware and settings to handle failover and get nice, fast disk performance via tiered storage. I think the hardware and setup cost (based on around 20TB of available storage and 128GB of RAM to run VMs) was around £19,000 (price includes VAT), with around £10,000 per year for their fully-managed support package. That's possibly more expensive than buying some servers and setting them up, but you do save on your time on the setup and maintenance - I figure I'm easily spending £10,000 worth of the school's time working on server-related issues.

 

So you're paying £50k every 5 years for support plus £20k every 5 years purchase cost for ... just two servers?

 

I am flabbergasted that schools have these kinds of budgets! We spend every year trying not to make staff redundant!

 

Don't take offence, just jealous really

[localzuk]

We've looked at Stone's "Equinox" product, basically two servers set up with Server 2016 and Storage Spaces with all the required hardware and settings to handle failover and get nice, fast disk performance via tiered storage. I think the hardware and setup cost (based on around 20TB of available storage and 128GB of RAM to run VMs) was around £19,000 (price includes VAT), with around £10,000 per year for their fully-managed support package. That's possibly more expensive than buying some servers and setting them up, but you do save on your time on the setup and maintenance - I figure I'm easily spending £10,000 worth of the school's time working on server-related issues.

I'm gobsmacked. That's *outrageously* expensive. In 5 years, you're paying £69,000 for 2 servers with storage. My flabber is gasted.

[dhicks]

So you're paying £50k every 5 years for support plus £20k every 5 years purchase cost for ... just two servers?

 

Just to clarify: this is a system similar to what we'd like to purchase, we haven't got as far as actually buying it yet...

 

That's two servers and all their storage / network hardware - each server is hefty enough to run multiple VMs, and should have enough capacity to support out entire network. If one server goes down the other seamlessly takes over, and any components are replaced under warranty - if something breaks, all we have to do is wait for someone to come and fix it. I guess, in total, over 5 years we'd be spending around £14,000 a year on hardware / support costs (technically a bit more as we still have to maintain an on-site server cupboard with cooling) - that's at least half the cost of employing someone to do the same job.

 

I can, in theory, go and buy a bunch of hardware and configure it, but it takes time to get the specifications correct and test everything. In practice, a school environment doesn't lend itself to sitting and working on server configuration for a block of time, I get pulled away to do other stuff, which results in systems being put in place where we aren't confident are absolutely solid. The school's money would be better spent paying for a tested, warrantied system that doesn't need anyone on-site to maintain.

 

You're quite correct in that £20,000 for a couple of servers is a sizeable cost, and if anyone from Stone or companies with similar offerings happen to see this then it'd be interesting to hear from them. I should add that £20,000 is quite reasonable compared to the pricing we've seen for some other similar systems!