Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
6 Posts
0
9709
Need help deciphering sys configuration for a used 2850- specifically RAID
My original post was deleted due to the inclusion of service tag numbers- oops! Here's my original post(sans service tags)and followups if anyone can continue to help me sort this out:
I am evaluating some used 2850 servers for an ugrade with our business software. Their recommended platforms are 2800/2850 or 2900/2950 with dual Xeon processor, 2GB EEC mem, (3) 36GB SCSI HDD and RAID 5. (although RAID 1 and 2 HDD is acceptable) Server systems are new to me (were moving from a workgroup environment to server/client) and so I'm on the bottom end of the learning curve. These two systems appear to meet the basic criterea, except that I can't decipher what the RAID setup or capabilities are. I realize that I will need a 3rd HDD as well, but that seems relatively minor as long as the rest of the necessary items are there. here are links to the two I am considering (I do need 2) and thanks in advance for anyone who can help me.
These are what I think are the applicable lines from the original system config- since I cannot post the link or service tag
| 1 | 4D554 | Dual In-line Memory Module 256, 400M, 32X72, 8, 240, Raid On Mother Board |
| 1 | H1813 | Printed Wiring Assy Input/output, RAID-KEY, Server DELL, TRIO |
| 1 | R4685 | Kit, Documentation/Diskette PERC4E/DI/SI/TRIO |
| 1 | G3399 | Battery, Primary, 3.7V, 6MM Lithium, Raid On Mother Board |
| 0 | C9892 | SERVICE CHARGE..., DRIVER..., PERC4E/DI, ROMB |
By SpeedStep in PowerEdge HDD/SCSI/RAID
Raid 5 with only 3 drives is russian roulette.
Raid5 needs 5 drives and 1 or 2 hot spares.
Lose 1 drive with raid 5 you are critical, Lose 2 you are dead.
http://miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt
By pcmeiners in PowerEdge HDD/SCSI/RAID
"Raid 5 with only 3 drives is Russian roulette."
With the newer adapters capable of Patrol Reads, it is not Russian Roulette, also the drive sizes are relatively small which make them safer. I work on many servers and not lost a raid 5 in many years, 1 hotspare is sufficient. Speedstep, please stop scaring newbies to death.
Iarnontq......
Before we even look at the configurations we need some forum food (information). How many workstations do you have. What will the servers be used for eg. fileserver, Exchange, SQL etc. How tight a budget do you have. What operating system. Active Directory or a workgroup network.
Off the bat you should have the minimum of 4 Gig ram on any server. For SAFETY you should have the operating system on a raid 1, and the data on another raid, be it raid 1,raid 5, or raid 10 . A separate raid1 for the OS as it is nearly indestructible, the hardest to rebuild.
Feed us some more forum food.
By lamontq in PowerEdge HDD/SCSI/RAID
We are currently being recommended to go with 2 servers. One dedicatied to run our vendor's inventory/*** system (Only certified for Server Standard 2003 32bit) along with SQL and the second for basically anything else we want- Exchange, etc. Apparently, there are known conflicts with Exchange Server and thus the recommendation for running two servers.
We run 12 workstations total. 7 of them will be utilizing the inventory/*** system along with running MS Office, internet access, printer sharing, etc. The other 5 run MS Office, independent apps like QB or shipping programs and are connected mostly for access to printers, a few shared files, internet access and interoffice communication. In the next two years this might grow by 2-5 workstations overall.
As far as how they plan on configuring the OS and RAID, I don't know, but these are their basic recommendations for a user my size. I just need to get the equipment and send it of to them for staging.
pcmeiners
4 Operator
4 Operator
•
1.8K Posts
0
April 16th, 2009 17:00
Sweet of Dell, I lost a >30 minute post .....
The new Poweredge 2900 series will blissfully run 2003 32 bit and SQL. There is a VERY noticeable speed difference between the 2800 series and the newest units. Forget there is a 2800 series, along with SCSI disks. Now if you could get the vendor to go Windows 2008, with SQL 2005, you would really have a nice package, but I realize the vendor likely hangs with Neanderthals, hoping to become a FOSSIL.
SAS drives and controllers are faster and SCSI is history. Obtaining SCSI drives a few years down the road will be EXTREMELY expensive and extremely difficult to find. Good luck if you go with SCSI, hope you have a direct line to the guy upstairs, as you will require miracles in the future to produce usable scsi drives.
Disk system setup for the Vendor's server ...
Raid 1 for the operating system, 4 to 6 drive raid 10 for the data directory, hotspare or global hotspare drive , 15k rpm drives all round...the disk system if you have the resources, very fast and expensive; the raid choice of IT royalty, as you will need to part with some jewels.
or
Raid 1 for the operating system, 4 drive (minimum) raid 5, hotspare drive, 10-15k drives..if resources are tight, with the number of users you have, will be plenty fast. Many of my small business clients are running raid 5 with SQL, no complaints whatsoever.
Someone may chime in recommending SBS server on the second server due to Exchange. My recommendation, with your small network even with growth, get a hosted Exchange provider such as 123together.com for Outlook. If you factor in the extra Exchange maintenance, and Exchange's resource/performance hogging, the cost is not bad. I have a number of clients using 123togther.com for hosted Outlook, uptime is excellent, support is excellent, maintenance is nil once setup. I love it... I hate dealing with EMAIL, time consuming and absolutely boring.
For the second server, depends if you go with SBS, if you will run Exchange on it. You still need a raid 1 no matter what for safety. You could run your network as a workgroup, but even with the number of users you have, Active Directory would be the way to go. If your vendor considers this an issue, AD for the number of users you have or could grow, to triple your present base, will have an absolute minuscule affect on performance, hard to measure with ANY benchmark (software or disk benchmark), I have tried. Again I would go with a 3.0 quadcore. If budget is realy tight, SATA drives.
Let us know the game plan, still need more forum food....which reminds me, I need some physical food.
Anyone feel free to chime in.
Go ahead Dell , delete the entire thread, make my day.
PS. The Dell point *** (Dell's censor jumped in), ( a word beginning with the letter f ,as defined by word.net= a small being, human in form, playful and having magical powers) is super cheap, 5 points for all this work :emotion-1: Glad he's not my boss
lamontq
6 Posts
0
April 16th, 2009 18:00
There definitely is a budget- especially after they surprised be and told me that I would need 2 servers. By the time I buy SQL, Srvr2003, and all the other b.s., which are not optional, the hardware $$ is shrinking fast. The 2850's are fairly inexpensive.
In their defense, I believe he specified that I should look for SCSI for speed reasons in the 2800. I don't believe that they are specifying SCSI with the 2900s that are certified, but there isn't enough budget for two 2900s- even used.
Are SAS or SATA drives compatible with the 2800s and the RAIDs in the 2800s? It seems that most of what I've found for 2800/2850s all have SCSI drives
Thanks for taking the time to repost
pcmeiners
4 Operator
4 Operator
•
1.8K Posts
0
April 17th, 2009 06:00
EBay for a 2900 , but there are risks.
"Are SAS or SATA drives compatible with the 2800s and the RAIDs in the 2800s? It seems that most of what I've found for 2800/2850s all have SCSI drives"
No the 2800 series is SCSI only, new adapter/drive cage etc needed, trust me your cutting your own throat with SCSI. At this point I have a hard time finding new SCSI drives, 4 years down the road is another matter, possible >4 times the price if you can find one .
Have to leave for a client, hopefully someone chimes in.
Ok, I see the points went up on the last post, perhaps working for the " small being, human in form, playful and having magical powers" would not be so bad :emotion-1: Do you "small beings, human in form, playful and having magical powers" have a union and benefits? Not sure if I would fit in, I am 6"6", 210 lbs, are there height restrictions ?