If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Server Advice
I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient? Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops FTP Required also Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it. Thank you. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Remedy" wrote in
: I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient? Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops FTP Required also Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it. Thank you. Just say "no". Trust me. Lordy |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Remedy" wrote in
: I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient? Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops FTP Required also Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it. Thank you. A bit more detail ... The company need to pay for a IT professional and hardware. They also need to pay for support. From your post you do not have the skills or long term resources to undertake this task. Thats not a criticism of you. I dont have the skills to do many things . I probably could build a reliable PC, but not confident up to business file standards (depending on how bullet proof they wanted it). They also have to be prepared to pay the going rate for what they want. If you build this server and it goes tits up, and they lose all thier backups and orders , and lose money, its not going to bode well for you or them. Point them at Dell, or Compaq websites / sales advisors. Then leave well alone Lordy |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Lordy wrote in news:Xns95B97478C3322lordybigfootcom@
130.133.1.4: "Remedy" wrote in : I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient? Point them at Dell, or Compaq websites / sales advisors. Then leave well alone Last word. An OEM solution from Dell, Compaq, HP etc will likely be cheaper than anything you or I could build of comparable quality. Lordy |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Remedy wrote:
I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? A server is simply a machine which concentrates resources and makes them accessible to a number of clients. Most 'server' systems are grossly overspecced for the job at hand, although if you plan to run server-based software, such as MS SQL Server, you'll need a grossly overspecced machine. Also, define 'Backups'. How much data, and do you mean backup as in 'it's on the server and the client', or backup as in 'it's written nightly to removable media that is stored elsewhere'. Here I back up about 8Gb each night, which is _WAY_ too much (but you try and persuade users to tidy up their directories). I used to do this to OnStream ADR tapes (30Gb capacity), but the drive failed and they don't make them any more, so I'm now writing to DVD-RAM. An alternative to nightly removable media backups is to keep the files on a RAID. You can build cheap SATA raids with many budget motherboards. However you should still do periodic backups to removable media, because while a RAID will survive a disc failure, it won't survive a fire or other disaster. Is XP Pro sufficient? This will provide you with the ability to create shares that up to ten users can access. No more than ten sessions are possible. With the server products (Windows 2003 Server, etc.) you have to buy client access licenses (CALs) for the number of users. Each session is a single client connecting to the server (to any number of shares) Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops If you don't expect that to grow, then XP Pro would suffice, although personally I'd go with 2000 if I HAD to use windows... FTP Required also Does this mean it will be internet-facing as well. Welcome to the world of trying desperately to keep up with the number of exploits out there. Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it. Then you really ought to explore it. In the non-windows world, the likes of Samba throw the idea of session limits and client access licenses out of the window. You can get the same oomph out of older hardware, and lower cost, or in my case NO cost (recycled hardware, and free/homebrew software). As a guide, I have one 'server' here, which is a 300MHz AMD K6/2, with 128Mb of memory, a pile of large discs, and a network card, serving 30-40 users with a couple of dozen file shares via SMB or NFS, has an FTP server, runs the internal DNS and DHCP. It's been up for 364 days (which probably means I'm overdue for a long power cut that will flatline the UPS today), and the load average on it barely registers (current is 0.00, but I've seen it get to 0.23) The backup runs automatically each night. No special software is involved (I wrote the backup script myself, all of 144 lines(bash script) and 198 lines(in C) including comments). It gathers, compresses, and sorts backup filesets to make the best use of the media involved. It's cheap, effective, fast enough, and I reckon I could squeeze a MySQL server in there too. --- So, to really offer proper advice, you need to think about volumes of data, whether any local processing is involved, security of data, whether you want to offer any other network services, like DNS, DHCP, IMAP/POP3 Mail, etc. And do not allow anyone to install MS Office on the server, or anything else for that matter. The MS Marketing machine likes things like Word to start 'instantly', so even if you are not using an office application, all of the DLL's get loaded at startup anyway. Besides, if you put user applications on the server, it soon becomes someone's desktop instead. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
To add to my previous post, and to echo Lordy's comments..
Building and configuring a server yourself without the necessary knowledge to do so is not something you want to do. Building and configuring a server yourself WITH the necessary knowledge to do so is also not something you want to do unless it is your job to do so. Servers are machines that organisations depend upon. If they are expecting you to provide support for it, don't go there unless you are willing to deal with the one inevitable component of any server. That component is called a USER USERS come in many varieties. Some users are technically minded. These users are dangerous, because they will mess with the server and you'll have a great time finding out why something you set up isn't working quite the same way any more. Most users are highly-skilled, fully-trained, professional idiots. These users are dangerous, as they will mess with your sanity. Either way, unless they are paying you to look after it, then you don't want to do it. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Howes wrote:
don't go there unless you are willing to deal with the one inevitable component of any server. That component is called a USER USERS come in many varieties. Some users are technically minded. These users are dangerous, because they will mess with the server and you'll have a great time finding out why something you set up isn't working quite the same way any more. Most users are highly-skilled, fully-trained, professional idiots. These users are dangerous, as they will mess with your sanity. It would help if you had access to one or more BSI's |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Salem wrote:
It would help if you had access to one or more BSI's British Standard Idiots? Broken System Interfaces? Banana Skin Instances? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Howes wrote:
Michael Salem wrote: It would help if you had access to one or more BSI's British Standard Idiots |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
the only difference between a server and a PC is the OS all the rest of the
hardware can be in both a pc and a server XP pro is not a server OS as such "Remedy" wrote in message ... I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient? Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops FTP Required also Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it. Thank you. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit, Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new ! | vvcd | AMD x86-64 Processors | 0 | September 17th 04 09:07 PM |
Salvage Server Project | Ablang | General | 0 | July 27th 04 02:30 AM |
server requirements question | michel | General | 3 | July 12th 04 10:24 AM |
Rackmount server specifications | News | General | 0 | May 20th 04 06:16 AM |
server advice | YT | General | 1 | March 18th 04 07:11 PM |