Fileserver Hardware (Windows 2008 R2) DFS-R with a NAS

[MrWu]

Hi all;

 

We will have 2 physical filservers implemented over summer with DFS for consistent share names.

 

We have a little budget left and I'm trying to get the SMTs to let me build a small DR cabinet somewhere else in the building where I hope to install:

 

Third DC

Long term DPM server

Backup VM server replicated with Veeam to run essential VMs if primary server room or SAN goes pop

A replicating fileserver

 

With the Fileserver side of things I could probably build a homebrew fileserver from the bits left after the upgrades(the bits are very old though!), however this being long term and if I have enough budget left I was wondering whether a NAS with DFS-R capability is suitable, like a Thecus N8800Pro?

 

Ta

[jamesfed]

A while back some fellow edugeekers introduced me to a company called xcase (Pc cases and computer cases online at X-Case.) who do rack server chassis which could help with your file server (save going with HP/Dell kit if you are happy with a custom build).

We only went for a 6 HDD bay model but they have plenty of options

 

As far as a backup server goes we are just in the same situation as you a few months ago but came across some luck when a local company donated a old file server to us (8x1TB HDDs in a SAS compatible Chenbro case). Cost us about £280 to get a new Mobo/RAM/SSD to boot from/CPU for it and we used some old LSI cards we had spare for RAID. No clue how much it would cost to do one from scratch but I know it would be cheap doing a custom.

Made a blog post about it here - Time for a new backup server | my world of IT

[jamesfed]

Just for fun I did the maths and if we were to do a brand new build of our backup server right now it would cost around £1,400 for the hardware - pretty nice for 6.6TB of RAID5 storage.

 

Naturally would be more with bigger 2TB drives but it gives you a number at least.

[glennda]

To be honest if you are going to have a Large Server with DPM installed would it not be easier to add a couple of extra Disk drives to it and also include that in the DFS replication? Therefore you saving you bill on electrics? The disk costs will cover themselves in leccy after a year or so.

[oxide54]

DPM can get quite resource intensive depending on what you've got going on with it. probably best not to mix the two. (false economy)

[glennda]

DPM can get quite resource intensive depending on what you've got going on with it. probably best not to mix the two. (false economy)

 

If its only for have a secondary copy in case of server failure (without users actually accessing data) then I can't see a problem - essentially its a backup anyway?

[oxide54]

have you used DPM?

[jamesfed]

DPM can get quite resource intensive depending on what you've got going on with it. probably best not to mix the two. (false economy)

 

+1 for that - our DPM server chews through 6GB+ of RAM while running a backup (mainly SQL server usage) - CPU utilisation isn't too high on a quad core AMD A6 though.

 

Either way the disk IO is the real heavy hitter - I have seen response times go into the 1,800ms region before which is one of the reasons why I have the OS on a separate SSD.

[oxide54]

hi james,

 

where is your DPM sql?

[jamesfed]

hi james,

 

where is your DPM sql?

 

Local on the server running off the SSD.

[oxide54]

ok thanks, I might give the SSD a go

[jamesfed]

ok thanks, I might give the SSD a go

 

It certainly works a treat - the case we are using has a 9th 2.5" bay inside the case which can be used to separate the OS from the drives you are using to run the backups which certainly helps keep things running smooth when the IO heats up!

[oxide54]

i've just been to have look I think i'm going to have to velcro the SSD to side of the case of something silly!

 

definitely know what you mean, i do think the SQL IO is fighting the DPM disk IO for the recovery / replica partitions.