Announcement Banner

elDude2002

updated

1 month ago

E

elDude2002

13 Posts

0

147000

February 9th, 2014 14:00

Poweredge 2950 Home Setup

Hi Guys,

I was wondering if someone can help me out choosing setup for my home server (software wise).

I just upgraded my PE860 to PE2950 III. On PE860 I had Windows Server 2012 Essential but since my school is giving me all MS software for free I was thinking about going with Windows Server 2012 R2 Standard.

PE 2950 Config:

1. 2x 2.33 GHz Quad Xeon E5410
2. 16GB RAM
3. Perc 6/I with RAID 1 - 2 x 146GB 15k and RAID 5 - 4 x 750GB, 2 slot still empty

 

Primary I will be using server as:

- Fileserver, Media Storage

- SQL Server 2012 Business Intelligence

- Visual Studio 2013 Pro

- IIS

- in near future as CCTV NVR


1. Should I go with Essential or Standard version since it's free anyway?

2. Should I setup some virtualization, separate for each activity?


Thank you

  • theflash1932

    11 Legend

    •

    16255 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 9th, 2014 15:00

    I would be inclined to say 'Standard' ... Standard includes, in the single license, the ability to run 2012 directly on the hardware for management purposes, and TWO virtual instances within that physical instance ... so, basically, you can run two servers for the price of one (just remember the license does not allow you to do anything besides Hyper-V management in the physical/host instance. 

    You could do your development stuff in one virtual machine and the media stuff on the other (or run only the dev VM and use the physical/host for media stuff ... or if you have multiple licenses, install as many VMs as you have licenses for and/or need).

    Virtualization is the future (correction, it is already the present standard for server deployment), so if the idea is to stay abreast and versed in current trends and technologies, then do as much virtualization as possible - at least as much as is feasible, given your projects (it is also important to recognize the differences and limitations of each).

    I might be inclined to recommend you put your 4x750GB disks in a RAID 10, as you will get better overall performance from a RAID 10 than a RAID 5 (RAID 5 has good read performance but bad write performance (bad for some database use and probably for recording media (NVR)) and RAID 10 has good read and write performance).

    Essentials is not only more limited, it is less flexible.  For example:

    • you MUST implement Active Directory with Essentials (with special exceptions) - it is optional with Standard (I.e. you can use a workgroup)
    • fewer IIS and other types of connections (although it might still be enough for your 'home' setup)
    • Hyper-V (for running virtual machines) is NOT available in Essentials
    • Essentials includes a license for only one virtual machine OR one physical machine - not both
    • is more "wizard-driven", so is managed differently (with fewer options) than Standard

  • elDude2002

    13 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 12th, 2014 13:00

    Thank you for your help

  • theflash1932

    11 Legend

    •

    16255 Posts

    2425

    0

    Posted February 13th, 2014 14:00

    I wouldn't get the Reds for the same reason as the Greens ... the power-saving features are more likely to cause you issues and headaches on an enterprise-class RAID controller.  I would only consider the Reds for use in NAS devices for which they were designed to work (Drobo, QNAP, Synology, etc. - which implement a far different type of RAID/storage than direct-attached server/enterprise storage).

  • elDude2002

    13 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 10th, 2014 12:00

    Thank you so much for detailed answer. Couple more questions:

    1. How much hardware resources should I apply to each instance. Per your advice I will be installing two VM's: dev VM and media VM. Should I go 50/50 of available resources? Or leave some for physical/host 30/30/40?

    2. I have a spare 500GB SATA drive. Can I use it as a stand alone drive for backing up system files? or that's not a good idea?

     

  • theflash1932

    11 Legend

    •

    16255 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 10th, 2014 12:00

    1. The host, because you won't be (can't, per licensing restrictions) doing anything in the host that requires many resources (no file server, no IIS, no AD .... just Hyper-V), can be configured with the minimum required/recommended.  As far as the remaining ... it depends.  It depends on the usage and activity of the machine.  You CAN adjust this later (number of processing cores and memory) as a setting in the virtual machine, so you don't need to figure it out right now - you can simply adjust it as needed.  If you have 8 cores and 16GB available, I would assign 4GB and 2 cores to each virtual machine, then increase as needed.  Adding storage isn't as easy, but consider what you are going to run on each RAID array.  It might be tempting to through your host OS on the 146GB/15K drives, then configure your VHD's on the RAID 10 (or 5).  However, you will be putting your fastest storage under the host OS that will not be doing much of anything, while the VM's on the VHD's on the RAID 10 (7.2K RPM SATA) are doing all the real work.  You could, of course, create a VHD on the RAID 1 for faster storage, but you will be limited on size if it also has the 60-100GB OS partition.  My first impression would be to install the OS to the RAID 10, configure the VHD for the dev VM on the 146GB/15K RAID 1, then the CCTV stuff on the RAID 10 ... BUT it depends on too many things for that to be a recommendation, like where you need the speed the most. 

    2. Yes, you can.  The PERC does NOT support non-RAID, so you can't "just use" it ... you need to create a single-disk RAID 0 with it - it will then be available as a new "disk" in Disk Management.

    I will take this opportunity to strongly recommend AGAINST using cheap/desktop/consumer SATA drives.  They are unsuitable for use on enterprise RAID controllers, like the PERC.  You will likely have no end of issues with them.

  • elDude2002

    13 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 10th, 2014 13:00

    All makes sense, I will give another thought to my drive setup. What about consumer drives designated for NAS, f.e. WD Red and Black series? I have two SAS 500GB 7.2k at home but was thinking about replacing them with WD Black series.

  • theflash1932

    11 Legend

    •

    16255 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 10th, 2014 13:00

    "What about consumer drives designated for NAS, f.e. WD Red and Black series?"

    I wouldn't.  Take a look at the RE4's (RE = RAID Edition) ... WD has tested/validated them for the PERC.  WD has validated the Reds only for use in NAS devices (not enterprise RAID/storage systems), and WD discourages the use of Blacks in [enterprise] RAID.

    "I have two SAS 500GB 7.2k"

    500GB is more likely a SATA drive.

  • theflash1932

    11 Legend

    •

    16255 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 12th, 2014 13:00

    It's up to you.  If you have issues, there won't be much anyone can do to help you, and you can probably safely assume that any storage-related issues are because of the drives.  Just make sure that all your firmware (system and drives) is up to date so everything is operating the best it knows how, and be religious (Mormon style, not catholic style) with your backups.  You said 2x500GB in RAID 1 is "not enough" ... are you planning to put them in a RAID 0?  If so, then double your backup efforts/frequency.

    The drive you mentioned (MM0500FBFVQ) is a "near-line" SAS drive ... not much better than a SATA drive with a SAS interface.  It would be cheaper to do SATA without sacrificing much performance/reliability (comparing with enterprise, not consumer, SATA).  Food for thought:

    500GB Black SATA (7200RPM) - $70:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236345

    500GB RE4 SATA (7200RPM) - $87:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G1740181

    1TB RE4 SATA (7200RPM) - $125:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G15S7205

    In comparison, here is a 500GB Near-Line SAS (7200RPM) drive - $170:
    http://www.yobitech.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=T349H&click=1098

    If you wanted to get serious about performance, without going the SSD route , this is what you would be looking for:

    600GB (15000RPM) - $275:
    http://www.serverhdd.com/hard-drive/sas/sas-6gbits/600gb-15000rpm/t335r

    To me, going with an RE4 is a no-brainer ... $17 extra for a drive that WD says will work on your controller, vs. saving $17 on a drive that WD recommends you NOT use on your controller.

  • elDude2002

    13 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 12th, 2014 13:00

    BTW Thank you very much for help.

  • elDude2002

    13 Posts

    3572

    0

    Posted February 12th, 2014 13:00

    I dbl checked those drives - MM0500FBFVQ, so they are SAS. 500GB in RAID1 is not enough and the SAS prices are quite high for my home use.


    So the problem I'm having is either getting new consumer SATA drives or used SAS drives of ebay. I'm leaning towards new vs used.