CougTek
Hairy Aussie
Even if it would be fast enough, wouldn't we be accused of recommending an obsolete platform - ie : one that's about to be phased out?
Building a Storage Server Thread
- Thread starter Mercutio
- Start date
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
i dont think it matters, the server would have no problem fulfilling its role and could easily increase capacity at a later date
btw, 512MB is on the high side for a file server... 256Mb would be fine if it meant we could save an acceptable amount of money. Also, a 1.6A p4 is just as likely as good as a 2.4 in this situation... even a northwood celeron would probably work 90% as good as an equally clocked p4, but cost about a third the price.
SiS chipsets are good as well(have proven faster in many disk benchmarks than intel), why is nobody mentioning them?
btw, 512MB is on the high side for a file server... 256Mb would be fine if it meant we could save an acceptable amount of money. Also, a 1.6A p4 is just as likely as good as a 2.4 in this situation... even a northwood celeron would probably work 90% as good as an equally clocked p4, but cost about a third the price.
SiS chipsets are good as well(have proven faster in many disk benchmarks than intel), why is nobody mentioning them?
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
I've never seen such a thing as an SiS chipset beating an Intel one for PCI bus efficiency. They aren't bad, but second to Intel. As far as disk benchmarking results, most I've seen were made by people with questionable computer skills using questionable testing methods and questionable (STR-centric) benchmarking applications.blakerwry said:
Nothing of what I've read so far suggests me that SiS chipsets provide superior disk performances compared to Intel's chipsets. It doesn't mean they are bad, it only means I haven't seen reasonable evidence that they are superior.
As to why no one mentioned them, well probably because SiS is still assosciated with "cheap" and that "cheap" sounds like "unreliable" for people working in the server business. While I would dare to use a SiS-based mainboard for a server, I believe our article would be overlooked by many if we put something that isn't made by Intel or ServerWorks. A Tyan made server mainboard for AMD processors could be serious enough. The problem here being the targeted audience of the article, not the actual quality of the product used for the server. Perception is the key.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
coug, have you seen recent benchamrks of the 533/800MHz SiS chipsets? They're really very good... The SiS 655fx for example beating the 865PE chipset nearly hands down(very similar performance to the 875P). Similar results can be seen when comparing the SiS 651 vs intel 845PE chipset.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
<laugh> I used to run a 10MB Ether server with ~40 users on a 486/50MHz with maybe 32MB RAM. Even then, the CPU stayed under 10% busy pretty much all the time. Of course, that was Netware. Really, the cheapest of the cheap CPUs should be more than adequate for any modest workgroup server if all it's doing is file & print. Even at 100Mb. Probably even at Gb Ether.blakerwry said:
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Okay, so we've heard arguments for less memory and a slower CPU. We've briefly discussed higher-priced components and some end-user priced items. But we still have not decided what we are going to build, who it is for and why it would be needed.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
My vote is for an A/V server capable of 2-3 simul video playbacks @ DVD quality over Ethernet (not through video-out). Capable initially of storing the equivalent of, say, 300 DVDs but expandableto 1500 or so. (My current collection is probably in the 650-700 disc range)
What other servers do people want to build?
(BTW, I think even modern 5400RPM drives would be sufficient for this class of machine. That could potentially lower the cost / heat even more.)
What other servers do people want to build?
(BTW, I think even modern 5400RPM drives would be sufficient for this class of machine. That could potentially lower the cost / heat even more.)
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
i think the media storage server was a good idea.. I recently built one myself.
print serving is also good, but pretty much requires either windows or a laser printer if you want to goto linux.
Besides storage for movies, what about music or ISO images... backups....
print serving is also good, but pretty much requires either windows or a laser printer if you want to goto linux.
Besides storage for movies, what about music or ISO images... backups....
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
Well, if it can handle a couple of video stream, handling several more audio-only streams should be a piece of cake unless the disks have to do a lot more seeking. Even then, system RAM/caching should alleviate that.blakerwry said:
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
An A/V server sounds good to me. It would be beneficial to many home users and A/V enthusiasts.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
what about wireless? I guess Merc might have the most experience here, can it handle DVD quality video streams? multiple ones? Any interference problems next to all that AV equipment?
Should wireless be a consideration of the server(ex: it has a wireless connection out directly to the clients), or just another part of the network(ex: it is wired to a network which has a wireless access point attached to it so wireless clients can connect through the AP/switch)?
Should wireless be a consideration of the server(ex: it has a wireless connection out directly to the clients), or just another part of the network(ex: it is wired to a network which has a wireless access point attached to it so wireless clients can connect through the AP/switch)?
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
blakerwry said:
That would be my recommendation.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
i just figured the more outgoing connections the better.
you could also use 2 NICs without bonding by using different IP schemes.
For example the server has 2 NICs
NIC 1 IP: 192.196.0.x w/ mask of 255.255.255.0
NIC 2 IP: 192.168.1.x w/ mask of 255.255.255.0
Client 1 & 2 have IP's on the 192.168.0.x address while client 3 uses 192.168.1.x Masks for clients are all 255.255.255.0
This would allow dedicated bandwidth between the server and client 3 if it uses the server more heavily because client 3 will by default connect to the server using the local subnet address(and if not by default you can hardwire it in the hosts file).
This is probably what I would do for a linux server.
you could also use 2 NICs without bonding by using different IP schemes.
For example the server has 2 NICs
NIC 1 IP: 192.196.0.x w/ mask of 255.255.255.0
NIC 2 IP: 192.168.1.x w/ mask of 255.255.255.0
Client 1 & 2 have IP's on the 192.168.0.x address while client 3 uses 192.168.1.x Masks for clients are all 255.255.255.0
This would allow dedicated bandwidth between the server and client 3 if it uses the server more heavily because client 3 will by default connect to the server using the local subnet address(and if not by default you can hardwire it in the hosts file).
This is probably what I would do for a linux server.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I could probably write for a couple of hours in this thread right now. This is really what I wanted to do today.
re: Video Streams. You can expect 1 100mbit interface to reliably deliver ONE from-the-VOB DVD video. If I try to hit two at once on the same interface, they're fine 90% of the time, but the other 10% they'll stutter and blink.
802.11A is not reliable enough for DVD-quality streaming. Stutter Stutter Stutter (think bad realvideo). That would likewise preclude .G and .B, I think. divx AVIs are another story. Moderate bit-rates (1200kpbs or so) seem to be OK.
802.11 is a shared media. There's 11 or 54Mbps to go around and that's it. As long as there's wireless somewhere, there's wireless. That's good enough. We have better things in mind for our PCI bandwidth.
A properly shielded case doesn't seem to cause undue interference between itself and audio componets. Just the same, my HTPC/media server is on a different electrical circuit from my Receiver, and there's a three 2U DVD jukeboxes and a VCR between the PC and the amp.
As far as server type goes, media server is the thing that springs to EVERYONE'S mind, but there's other things you can do do, too.
Near-line backup server - Storing ghost images for client PCs, and ISO images of important CDs. I do this for lab PCs, and it saves me hours of work probably every single week.
User Directory Server - Usually if I have the budget and there's a need for roaming-type profiles, I try to set user accounts up on one server and public-type dirs on another. If absolutely all of a user's default dirs are pointed back to that single server, you can get very serious indeed about virus control (does awful things to network utilization but hey, that's what it's for!)
The compelling argument in favor of a fast CPU is IMO the performance gain that comes from having a fast system bus. Fast CPUs can also handle more interrupts/second which could be a big deal if we hand NICs and disk controllers in every PCI slot.
On the other hand, even a "legacy" CPU has more than enough power to pass files around a LAN, making a low-heat, low cost chip like a P2-Celeron a reasonable choice.
In my opinion, if our goal is a media server that won't be doing encoding work on its own, I'd go with a decidedly low-end CPU. A P3 would be perfect; fast enough it could be pressed into service if need be, but also a low-power chip which would be friendly to whatever overworked PSU winds up our server.
RAM-wise I haven't found a need on a Samba file-only server to install more than 128MB. One of my TB-class Linux servers is right-this-moment using a whopping 78MB of RAM (er, without X or VNC or really much of anything else open besides a couple of Apache-related bits). Realistically, your need for RAM DOES grow as you add more stripe sets, controllers and network interfaces (i.e. as the capacity and capability of other aspects of your storage server improve, you also need more RAM). I'd probably go with 256MB just to be safe, but I don't think it's really needed for Samba.
For a Windows Server... I dunno. Buy stock in Crucial or something.
Honestly, I haven't found file transfer performance under Windows 2000 to improve all that much as I upgrade past 128MB. Other things DO get better (particularly in console sessions and application services) but not SMB. At least not enough that I've noticed (hint: set your server role to File and Printer Server).
Real hardware RAID is still worthwhile, if only because it's dimly possible yet ever-so-much more likely than a failure of the card, that the software RAID drivers on your server will be taken south by some delinquent program.
So... I think I'd want something like a SuperMicro P3TDLE ($220), P3-1.13GHz ($80 with fan) and a pair of brand names 128MB PC133 DIMMs ($25 or thereabouts).
Onto that I'd mount a $40 Trendware 64-bit GBoC NIC and a $425 7506-8.
Throw in 7 160GB Samsung drives (who cares if they're fast? We have 7 of 'em!), another $50 for a 40GB drive to boot from, and a CD-ROM drive - probably one of the $45 LiteOn CD-RW/DVD drives Newegg's been pimping since we're talking media server, a $225 Antec 4U22, and I'd call it a day, and just a hair under a $2000 budget.
How would something like that sound?
re: Video Streams. You can expect 1 100mbit interface to reliably deliver ONE from-the-VOB DVD video. If I try to hit two at once on the same interface, they're fine 90% of the time, but the other 10% they'll stutter and blink.
802.11A is not reliable enough for DVD-quality streaming. Stutter Stutter Stutter (think bad realvideo). That would likewise preclude .G and .B, I think. divx AVIs are another story. Moderate bit-rates (1200kpbs or so) seem to be OK.
802.11 is a shared media. There's 11 or 54Mbps to go around and that's it. As long as there's wireless somewhere, there's wireless. That's good enough. We have better things in mind for our PCI bandwidth.
A properly shielded case doesn't seem to cause undue interference between itself and audio componets. Just the same, my HTPC/media server is on a different electrical circuit from my Receiver, and there's a three 2U DVD jukeboxes and a VCR between the PC and the amp.
As far as server type goes, media server is the thing that springs to EVERYONE'S mind, but there's other things you can do do, too.
Near-line backup server - Storing ghost images for client PCs, and ISO images of important CDs. I do this for lab PCs, and it saves me hours of work probably every single week.
User Directory Server - Usually if I have the budget and there's a need for roaming-type profiles, I try to set user accounts up on one server and public-type dirs on another. If absolutely all of a user's default dirs are pointed back to that single server, you can get very serious indeed about virus control (does awful things to network utilization but hey, that's what it's for!)
The compelling argument in favor of a fast CPU is IMO the performance gain that comes from having a fast system bus. Fast CPUs can also handle more interrupts/second which could be a big deal if we hand NICs and disk controllers in every PCI slot.
On the other hand, even a "legacy" CPU has more than enough power to pass files around a LAN, making a low-heat, low cost chip like a P2-Celeron a reasonable choice.
In my opinion, if our goal is a media server that won't be doing encoding work on its own, I'd go with a decidedly low-end CPU. A P3 would be perfect; fast enough it could be pressed into service if need be, but also a low-power chip which would be friendly to whatever overworked PSU winds up our server.
RAM-wise I haven't found a need on a Samba file-only server to install more than 128MB. One of my TB-class Linux servers is right-this-moment using a whopping 78MB of RAM (er, without X or VNC or really much of anything else open besides a couple of Apache-related bits). Realistically, your need for RAM DOES grow as you add more stripe sets, controllers and network interfaces (i.e. as the capacity and capability of other aspects of your storage server improve, you also need more RAM). I'd probably go with 256MB just to be safe, but I don't think it's really needed for Samba.
For a Windows Server... I dunno. Buy stock in Crucial or something.
Honestly, I haven't found file transfer performance under Windows 2000 to improve all that much as I upgrade past 128MB. Other things DO get better (particularly in console sessions and application services) but not SMB. At least not enough that I've noticed (hint: set your server role to File and Printer Server).Real hardware RAID is still worthwhile, if only because it's dimly possible yet ever-so-much more likely than a failure of the card, that the software RAID drivers on your server will be taken south by some delinquent program.
So... I think I'd want something like a SuperMicro P3TDLE ($220), P3-1.13GHz ($80 with fan) and a pair of brand names 128MB PC133 DIMMs ($25 or thereabouts).
Onto that I'd mount a $40 Trendware 64-bit GBoC NIC and a $425 7506-8.
Throw in 7 160GB Samsung drives (who cares if they're fast? We have 7 of 'em!), another $50 for a 40GB drive to boot from, and a CD-ROM drive - probably one of the $45 LiteOn CD-RW/DVD drives Newegg's been pimping since we're talking media server, a $225 Antec 4U22, and I'd call it a day, and just a hair under a $2000 budget.
How would something like that sound?
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Oh yeah, video. The P3TDLE has an ISA slot. Our fictional server is accepting donations.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
That's under 2K if running Linux. Much more if it's running Win2k Server. If you pay for it, that is.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a media server to also be a game server. Most popular games seem to have Linux servers, so I'm not worried about that aspect of things, but would a 1.13GHz P3 suffice for LAN play of Counterstrike or Unreal or whatever kids are playing these days?
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
i was thinking the same thing Merc, great for the occasional LAN party.
But the problem is that the game server requirements can vary widely
I was specing a server for my old CS clan and one of the things we wanted was to be able to add bf1942 in addition to the few HL servers... we couldnt do it... a HL server will run on a pMMX, but the bf1942 server sucks a$$ and would occupy most of the time on a 2gHz machine I'm told (or atleast it did at release)
similarly, when going from CS 1.5 to 1.6 many people noticed that their pIII servers ran fine when full (about 16-20 people) and now with CS 1.6 half as many people on the server causes lag. ANd the add-ons like admin_mod and stats also consume more RAM and CPU time.
A single simple CS or DoD server should run fine on a pentium II using up about 4MB of RAM per player I think... so you'll want to dedicate 64MB of RAM for it in your calculations. Each player uses about 3KB/sec upload and download of bandwidth on average.
bf1942 on the otherhand is a fat hog. Think 50-80KB/sec and you'll need atleast a fast pIII(800MHz-1GHz) for a medium capacity server... I would dedicate 128B of RAM for the game server if not more.
what about a shoutcast/streaming mp3 server?
But the problem is that the game server requirements can vary widely
I was specing a server for my old CS clan and one of the things we wanted was to be able to add bf1942 in addition to the few HL servers... we couldnt do it... a HL server will run on a pMMX, but the bf1942 server sucks a$$ and would occupy most of the time on a 2gHz machine I'm told (or atleast it did at release)
similarly, when going from CS 1.5 to 1.6 many people noticed that their pIII servers ran fine when full (about 16-20 people) and now with CS 1.6 half as many people on the server causes lag. ANd the add-ons like admin_mod and stats also consume more RAM and CPU time.
A single simple CS or DoD server should run fine on a pentium II using up about 4MB of RAM per player I think... so you'll want to dedicate 64MB of RAM for it in your calculations. Each player uses about 3KB/sec upload and download of bandwidth on average.
bf1942 on the otherhand is a fat hog. Think 50-80KB/sec and you'll need atleast a fast pIII(800MHz-1GHz) for a medium capacity server... I would dedicate 128B of RAM for the game server if not more.
what about a shoutcast/streaming mp3 server?
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I've never paid much attention. Icecast works fine @ 10Mbit.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
http://www.wowway.com/~mckennma/after/new_outside.jpg
this looks like a neat product that I've never seen for adding more disk mounts in a case.
this looks like a neat product that I've never seen for adding more disk mounts in a case.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
So now it's no longer a media server? Is a game server in need of a TB of disk? I think you're getting OT.Mercutio said:
I think we should concentrate on what makes a good storage server for A/V or whatever other use we want. If you want to provide info about additional uses, add side-bars or better yet, follow-up articles describing the changes to accomodate additional uses.
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
blakerwry said:
They have had them for ATA for a while and probably SCSI for ever. I'm most excited to see them for SATA. Those rock.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
No more comments on the long post, above?
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
I tend to agree with what you said merc. I do have a question, I though DVD's were in the range of ~6Mbit/sec with peaks upto maybe twice that...
If we got 6MB/sec out of the server shouldnt that measn that we could get 2 steams 100% of the time.. and probably more since it's not very likely that each stream would simultaneously be at a peak.
I also have heard bad things about trendware's wireless NICs (dont know anything about their wired ones) Is this a qulity brand that we should trust or would you be better off with an Intel or 3Com NIC?
Also, I havent seen any mention of file system. I personally feel ext3/NTFS would be the most robust, but some of the other do seem to be faster.
If we got 6MB/sec out of the server shouldnt that measn that we could get 2 steams 100% of the time.. and probably more since it's not very likely that each stream would simultaneously be at a peak.
I also have heard bad things about trendware's wireless NICs (dont know anything about their wired ones) Is this a qulity brand that we should trust or would you be better off with an Intel or 3Com NIC?
Also, I havent seen any mention of file system. I personally feel ext3/NTFS would be the most robust, but some of the other do seem to be faster.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I don't know much about Trendware, either, except that they have the outstanding quality of being the lowest priced 64bit PCI GBoC NIC I could find. Probably worth looking in to.
Regarding DVD playback and streams per interface... I don't quite know what's going on with that. My theory is that DVD playback software doesn't deal with the odd out-of-sequence/bad packet very well.
Regarding DVD playback and streams per interface... I don't quite know what's going on with that. My theory is that DVD playback software doesn't deal with the odd out-of-sequence/bad packet very well.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
i was testing and using ifconfig on my linux server was showing maybe 1 packet error for every 100MB passed to a client when serving up a ~900MB movie file over SMB. I find this completely fine for my uses, I dont think this would really effect the servers ability to provide reliable music/video.
What kind of error rate are you seeing?
What kind of error rate are you seeing?
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
Well, maybe.Mercutio said:
It's still unclear which one people would prefer to see in the article. #2 would have my favor. I suspect #1 will be the most popular.Mercutio said:
While it might be powerful enough, I still believe we should use more recent (and easily available) components. It can be mentioned in the article that a lesser configuration would do the job but that currently selling part were used for the article. Remember that what's available "new" in USA isn't necessarily available "new" elsewhere. I would have a hard time to find a retail Pentium III around here.Mercutio said:
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I don't think there's anything else that's anything like affordable. Boards that support 64bit PCI tend to be dual, workstation-type boards.
Well, OK, the former googlegear - now "ZipZoomFly.com" seems to have an Intel SHG2 Xeon board with some PCI-X slots for $135... but then we'd have to buy a 400MHz P4 Xeon, which is particularly silly given the fact that this box isn't doing much processing... and those are probably harder to find than the P3s.
Well, OK, the former googlegear - now "ZipZoomFly.com" seems to have an Intel SHG2 Xeon board with some PCI-X slots for $135... but then we'd have to buy a 400MHz P4 Xeon, which is particularly silly given the fact that this box isn't doing much processing... and those are probably harder to find than the P3s.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Then lets design servers at three different price levels.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
And try to keep the differentiation between them only incremental changes. We would have to start with a good MB for sure.
ddrueding
Fixture
Building a base-level server with that mobo is going to be difficult. 32-bit PCI is a limitation, but if you can get by with it, you can save some cash. I'm looking at building another one of these for a friend:
ASUS A7N8X Deluxe (10/100 + GigE onboard, plus native sata channels for OS drives): $115
AMD Barton 2500+: $85
Thermalright SLK-900-A: $37
VANTEC's Tornado (92mm): $13
2x 256MB PC2700: $76
Asus V7100 (GF2 MX-fanless): $39
3Ware Escalade 8506-12: $734
10x Samsung SATA 160GB: $1360
2x WD360GD: $230
Antec 4U22 Rack mount Case (w/400W PS): $195
2x Supermicro 5-Bay Hot-Swapable SATA HDD Enclosure: $278
$3162 for 1.44TB of RAID5...plus:
-Dual ethernet
-OS on FAST seperate RAID1 Array (mobo based)
-Additional space for 320GB internally for $272
-Sufficient processing power
-robust colling capability
-Basic 3D acceleration
Stick SBS2k3 on this, and you have most home needs covered
ASUS A7N8X Deluxe (10/100 + GigE onboard, plus native sata channels for OS drives): $115
AMD Barton 2500+: $85
Thermalright SLK-900-A: $37
VANTEC's Tornado (92mm): $13
2x 256MB PC2700: $76
Asus V7100 (GF2 MX-fanless): $39
3Ware Escalade 8506-12: $734
10x Samsung SATA 160GB: $1360
2x WD360GD: $230
Antec 4U22 Rack mount Case (w/400W PS): $195
2x Supermicro 5-Bay Hot-Swapable SATA HDD Enclosure: $278
$3162 for 1.44TB of RAID5...plus:
-Dual ethernet
-OS on FAST seperate RAID1 Array (mobo based)
-Additional space for 320GB internally for $272
-Sufficient processing power
-robust colling capability
-Basic 3D acceleration
Stick SBS2k3 on this, and you have most home needs covered
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
why SB2k3?
ddrueding
Fixture
blakerwry said:
Doesn't everyone need an exchange and SQL server at home (in addition to IIS)? Use it as a firewall as well (with ISA) using your 2 NICs...
Or not, just run Server 2k3 OEM ($630)
Has anyone seen MS Storage Server 2003. (Never seent his before, seems to be OEM only??
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
Exchange, not at all. I've never used it. Every time I hear about Exchange, it seems to be mummyfied in "unsecured" bindings.ddrueding said:
MySQL 4.0x works well enough not to wonder about SQL Server.
I wouldn't use Microsoft's software for security (firewall) unless I have no other choice.
IMO, this heatsink/fan combo is way more noisy than necessary. I wouldn't overclock a CPU sitting inside a server box, so this cooling solution wouldn't make it on my list. Plus, that heatsink is quite heavy. It's not a problem for an enthusiast box, but for a server where reliability should be paramount, a heatsink within the CPU manufacturer's weight limit should be prefered.ddrueding said:
It's impossible, or at least very difficult, to use the same motherboard for all (let's say 3) different system configurations with different price levels.Howell said:
Base config could be Merc's P3-based proposition. There was also a Pentium 4 + i875P platform that made sense above. With Gbe separated from the PCI bus. Storage would still have been bandwidth-limited by the PCI bus, but the throughput would be acceptable nonetheless IMO. And there's of course Buck's config with the ServerWorks motherboard.
I don't see anything really interesting here with an AMD-based platform. A Tyan TigerMPX or other dual Athlon MP-capable mainboards are the only one with high-bandwidth PCI slots, but they are way more expensive than the P3 platform proposed by Mercutio and older and probably less efficient than Pentium 4 systems mentioned above. And anything with an Opteron is still too expensive, because of the CPU (Tyan K8W is similarly priced as the ServerWorks in Buck's config).
Is the above makes sense?
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
I don't think we'll ever have a consensus here. Many have vocalized their opinions and views on the matter, so anyone writing the article should have more than he'll need to make his choices on what and what not to put in the server(s).
Mercutio seems to have the most experience in small servers deployment (Fushigi's AS/400 monsters don't qualify for "small servers" - no offense) and he's been the one with the idea. He probably has a few boxes in use anywhere to back up his choices and say "that setup yields that kind of results".
IMO, he could write up something any time and it should make sense. Perhaps not unanimity, but sense, certainly.
Mercutio seems to have the most experience in small servers deployment (Fushigi's AS/400 monsters don't qualify for "small servers" - no offense) and he's been the one with the idea. He probably has a few boxes in use anywhere to back up his choices and say "that setup yields that kind of results".
IMO, he could write up something any time and it should make sense. Perhaps not unanimity, but sense, certainly.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
David,
Where are you getting the SP1614C for $136? Best price I've found for it is still over $150.
Also, I see that big, expensive fan on your system. Have you ever looked at a Speeze FalconRock or the awesome 5F263B1M3?
What you're building looks to me a lot more like a workstation than an actual server to me, SBS aside. I think you're better off with 2000 server and a Linux box taking care of any Backoffice-type applications... but maybe that's just because it's a lot easier to deal with Squid and an imap server than ISA and Exchange.
Where are you getting the SP1614C for $136? Best price I've found for it is still over $150.
Also, I see that big, expensive fan on your system. Have you ever looked at a Speeze FalconRock or the awesome 5F263B1M3?
What you're building looks to me a lot more like a workstation than an actual server to me, SBS aside. I think you're better off with 2000 server and a Linux box taking care of any Backoffice-type applications... but maybe that's just because it's a lot easier to deal with Squid and an imap server than ISA and Exchange.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
I agree Coug. We should elect Mercutio to write this article with the aid of any other members if they so choose, and let's get this thing completed.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Sadist.