Server hardware principles

[Ignatius]

I've mentioned in other threads that I support a small company which has several XP Pro and Vista workstations in a workgroup, rather than a domain. Two of the XP Pro workstations double up as a File Server and a Print Server (one each). The number of users is increasing gradually and I just know that we're going to have to move to something else soon. Recommendations have been for a Linux-based solution but I'd prefer to avoid that in favour of Windows 2003 (or maybe 2008) because I have experience with Windows systems and negligible with Linux.

 

Questions:

 

1. In general, what server hardware would be recommended? I know that I could combine the two server roles into one machine and have that running as a member server in the workgroup rather than go down the route of a domain. Ideally, I'd like to have some future-proofing in the hardware so it can run AD if (and when) we move to a domain.

 

2. What are the pros and cons of building (and supporting) my own kit vs. getting something from Dell, HP etc.? Are these pre-built OEM systems bundled with a whole load of short-term freebies (AV, CD/DVD software etc.) as pre-built OEM desktops and laptops seem to be? The reason why I'd aim to build my own is because I DON'T want these and would prefer to decide upon my own software solutions. I guess that pre-built has the option of warranty if things fall apart.

 

3. I have an inherent disliking for onboard RAID and would prefer to go for a PCI card solution, just in case the onboard controller(s) fail. It strikes me that it may be easier to replace the card (and rebuild the RAID) rather than have to source a replacement motherboard. Is this still a reasonable argument?

 

4. I've seen prices for pre-built servers vary between maybe £350 and £2,000. Presumably the cost is related to processor speed, RAM support, RAID etc.?

 

I just wonder if it might be appropriate for me to approach some members who aren't too far from me (in West Yorkshire) to enquire if I could visit them to see what they have and bounce some ideas from them? I realise that the school/college summer break is imminent.

 

Sorry to ask such noobish questions but, as I've read elsewhere, the only stupid question is the one that isn't asked!

[SYNACK]

1) Depends on the load and reliability that you want it to have, a little workgroup server would probably handle it fine (hp ML110). It is practically a desktop, quiet, small etc. If you are after high up times then something with dual PSUs like an hp ML350 would fit the bill better and is a vastly more able bit of hardware. AD itself weighs very little so unless you are planning on exchange usage the spec can be conservitave. I'd also be looking at Server 2008 as going 2003 now would be nuts. The replacment for 2008 is just about to be released, why purchase an OS two versions behind (assuming 2003 R2).

 

2) Servers are a completely different game to workstations and are not in general bundled with the junk that plagues the latter. Go with the branded solution, it will save you no end of hassles and pain in the short and long term. Firstly drivers are a pain for server OSs when it comes to box of bits pcs. Big brands like hp give you driver support for all the main server OSs and keep them up to date for a good long while after release. You can also get fantastic warranties on the big box gear that no smaller OEM will be able to properly match.

 

3) Agreed, onboard raid is trash get a propper controller with a good chunk of dedicated cache (at least 128 mb) also get one which supports volume portibility so that you have the option of replacing the controller with a newer modle or one with differing firmware versions in the event of a problem. Lesser controllers are constantly mesing with their own spec locking you not only into the one exact type of controller but also the specific firmware revision. hp smartarray controllers offer disk portibility so you can swapp out the controller with a newer/faster/better one in a snap.

 

4) The prices are very much based on the internal hardware, the little ml110s for instance have the beginnings of server gear in them but are very close to desktops with almost no redundancy and limited internal throughput and managment technology. Servers higher up the line offer hotswap drives, PSUs, memory, PCIe cards (sometimes) and even CPUs (very high end). They also include huge out of band managment potential with secondary systems that run along side the internals to moniter them and report back/provide control via a dedicated ethernet interface.

 

For your solution you will probably not need most of these features but it depends on your goals for the solution. If ultra high reliability is required then more redundancy is a good thing and if you see use of exchange and heavy file usage for about 20 users a little ml110 may not be sufficient. By the sounds of it though barring a large increase in the usage pattern one of those would suffice.

 

Sounds like a good idea to consult those around you to help you get the best solution for your environment.

[tmcd35]

I think Synack answered pretty much answered your questions there. Just thought I'd make the point of hardware redundancy. This is really what sets servers apart from 'beefed up workstations'.

 

Redundant PSU's, RAID arrays, ECC memory, Hot swappable drives, Redundant/bonded LAN cards, etc.

 

With servers it's always worth spending that little extra on an OEM solution (Dell, IBM, HP) than cheaper build to order options. Also it's more than worth the premium of buying a server with some or all the above features rather than a suped up workstation (aka the HP ML110)

[Ignatius]

Thanks guys for the guidance. I know that Exchange is "hungry" and should be installed on a server separate from the AD.

 

It looks as if the ML350 will be my starting point, particularly as the ML110 is no more than a super desktop and I would want prolonged uptime. As I said, the situation that we have at present is a number of desktops and laptops. The desktops and laptops were were sourced by my predecessor and are all Dells. I'm heartened to know that the OEM servers don't come bundled with lots that I neither need nor want and I'm also hearted to know that my opinion about the RAID options remains current.

 

Despite the useful comments received thus far, I'd welcome other input.

[Tricky_Dicky]

If you are buying a nice new server it's well worth looking at your backup solution at the same time. A tape back up drive built in is a lot neater and easier to work with in my opinion and will probably be cheaper to install at build time rather than afterwards.

Let us know which machine you go for and how it works out.

[Ignatius]

Good thinking Batman (aka Tricky_Dicky)!

[broc]

I agree about the need for backups, but having a tape backup system is ok as long as you have somewhere to restore it to, and something to restore it with. My experience is that a tape created on one drive may not always be be readable on another just like it. Unless you have multiple identical drives & test restores regularly you may be in for a nasty surprise if the server goes up in smoke & takes the drive with it.

 

You might find a small NAS device (or even use an old PC masquerading as a NAS box) worth considering as an alternative or even 'as well as' tape.

[Joe_Pineapples]

I've been shopping for some servers at the moment to replace older machines in some of the schools I support - The Dell Poweredge T605 (Dual CPU AMD Chassis) currently has £200 knocked off as well as a free second CPU - So if you spec the highest model CPU (Opteron 2384, 'Shanghai' Core) then you get the same one free, saving a further £410 according to Dell. I specced up a 2x Opteron 2384 box with 8Gb ram for £1200. Also included a 3 year hardware warranty.Tip - add your own Hdd's after purchase if you go this route, cos the Dell ones cost a fortune. This doesn't affect warranty.

 

I agree with the statement made earlier that buying top-tier manufacturer's servers (Dell, HP, IBM) will save you hours of time and stress in the long run, with driver support etc. I'm not an ardent Dell supporter as such and am open minded about my hardware suppliers, but over the last 5 years the servers that I've had least trouble from have all been Dell ones, and the most troublesome ones have been either the cheaper 'super desktop' types or the OEM built ones from the local PC shop.

 

Also 2008 server is wonderful software and I agree that there is absolutely no reason to use 2k3 these days. I love server 2008 and am constantly finding things in there which make my job easier.

 

I'm also in west yorkshire btw, PM me if you want a copy of any of my dell quotes for comparison. We should have the same area sales manager.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Joe_Pineapples
Hadnt finished it pressed return by mistake lol

[Ignatius]

That's useful - thanks. PM sent.

[maniac]

I'm assuming here that you're not employed by said company, but are contracted in every now and then to sort out their IT? If I'm wrong, please excuse, but from my experience setting up networks for small businesses and assuming the above I'd recommend the following;

 

Firstly forget the full versions of server 2008, exchange etc, What you want to run on it is Microsoft Small Business Server, which comes with cut down versions of programs like exchange so you have a solution out of the box which does everything most small businesses want. Windows Small Business Server: Overview

 

Buy servers from a reputable company like HP or Dell, who will sell a server pre-installed with small business server and will provide support for it as well. I always go massively over spec when pricing one up for a small business, as most of them expect to get 5-6 years or more out of an investment like that, and it's perfectly achievable if you buy the right hardware to start with. I concentrate on storage and buy servers populated with plenty of discs, and try and set them up with a 'hot spare' drive to provide maximum resilience when a drive fails (which will happen, it always does) If you've only got a small number of clients then you won't need a massively powerful server, although I would buy with at least 4GB of RAM as it will be running a lot of processes if you go down the SBS route.

 

Take advantage of most servers ability to send out automatic notifications if there are problems, and set it up so it e-mails the companies office address and the boss (and also yourself if the company are happy for you to do that). HP's server monitoring is particularly notable and will e-mail you at the slightest problem which is pretty handy, sometimes even notifying you of a part that is failing before it becomes a real problem.

 

One area a lot of small businesses over look is a UPS device. It is absolutely essential if you're running server to include one of these in your recommendation, and set it up so it shuts everything down properly if the power fails, and also more importantly starts it all back up again when the power is restored. Small businesses just want an ICT solution that works with little to no maintenance, something they can stuff in the back room and forget about so everything should be able to look after its self with little to no user intervention - it is achievable.

 

Another area is backup solutions, I would avoid tape backups - they are too clunky for most small businesses with no dedicated ICT personal and require regular cleaning and monitoring to make sure they are working. I would recommend signing up to a remote backup services of some sort (assuming the business has a broadband no-limits internet connection) there are many who specialise in backing up small business server, and it doesn't cost the earth either. Failing that, you can buy a fireproof/waterproof USB or Network attachable storage device, and use that for your backups and set the backup software to automatically overwrite the older backups, then it can just be left doing its job with no tapes to change etc. This isn't ideal, as hard drives are notoriously fragile and are not ideal backup devices, but I know from experience that most small businesses will forget to change tapes, or not put any in there to start with. If the backup software is setup properly, it should notify the business or yourself of any problems.

 

I've set up networks for a quite a number of businesses in the last few years, and I've seen some shocking installations that I've had to sort out! One business I helped was in a similar situation to where you are at the moment, they had about 5 clients all networked to one file server which was just running windows 2000 (The rest of them were running windows 98 at the time!) there was no backup strategy, and no fail safe devices on the server. The business owner was blissfully unaware of the risks to his expanding business of the set-up he had, and most are. Once you make people aware of the risks of doing things the way they are, they are usually more than willing to spend the cash on sorting it out.

 

I guess the final piece of advice is don't try and do it on the cheap, it's an 'all or nothing' type affair in my opinion. If you're going down the road of introducing a proper server, then you really should encourage the business owner to do it properly and not cut corners, they will thank you in the long run.

 

Mike.

[Ignatius]

That's really useful Mike, thank you. You are spot on in your first paragraph.

 

I've already undertaken an audit of what's is and isn't happening and discussed it with the boss. The ball's in his court now.

[Michael]

1. In general, what server hardware would be recommended?

 

All customers are different. Some prefer branded solutions and some prefer custom built solutions. Some OEMs do cut corners on the hardware they use (I'll leave this for another discussion), but my preference are Intel's server solutions based on Core 2 Duo or Xeon CPUs.

 

2. What are the pros and cons of building (and supporting) my own kit vs. getting something from Dell, HP etc.?

 

If you have the knowledge and expertise, building your own servers does have its advantages. In my experience I have sometimes found upgrading OEM servers to be relatively limiting (such as CPU compatibility or support), or memory upgrades. OEMs will charge a lot more for their rebranded hardware upgrades. You can usually go and buy generic OEM hardware upgrades cheaper, but of course this would probably invalidate your warranty.

 

3. I have an inherent disliking for onboard RAID and would prefer to go for a PCI card solution, just in case the onboard controller(s) fail.

 

Well hypothetically speaking if an onboard RAID controller or a PCI RAID controller failed, you'd still be in the same position; temporarily without a server. My preference is to have everything integrated as it simplifies hardware replacements, but speed can also be better. Depending what type of PCI card you use PCI 32bit, PCI-X or PCI-Express, they all give different results.

 

4. I've seen prices for pre-built servers vary between maybe £350 and £2,000. Presumably the cost is related to processor speed, RAM support, RAID etc.?

 

For a small environment a Core 2 Duo will easily be suffice, with anywhere between 2-4GB of memory. As a minimum RAID1 on the system drive and RAID1 or RAID5 on your data. Having everything on one big RAID5 array (system and data) can create twice the amount of work in the event of a failure. Having two separate arrays can and does make a difference in a recovery situation.

 

If you're planning on implementing Exchange, using a hosting provider for a small amount of users is cheaper and more convenient. Outlook Web Access allows employees to access e-mail from anywhere and cuts down on server administration and of course Exchange and Exchange CALs.

This also allows you to keep your server internal facing only (which does improve security), whereas implementing Exchange would require it to be public facing and again requires more emphasis on security, especially on Windows servers.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Michael