Building first server - input?

[coolVariable]

Buying the parts for a server for a small film company with 18 employees (might grow to 30 over the next 2 years).
The primary use for the system is as a file server with different permissions.
The current server (a LaCie) holds approx. 500GB of data and they are adding approximately 100GB per year (maybe more with the current rate of growth).
On-site backup of the data is key ... I am also open for off-site backup ideas.
I am thinking about a RAID10 setup of 1TB drives since that provides plenty of space (2TB), on-site backup and pretty good speeds.

I am totally open for suggestions. The company received a bid from an IT company but a very quick and dirty price check on Newegg showed that they charged approximately 200% of the newegg price.


Based on their suggestions, I am looking at the following:

1x HP ProLiant ML350 G5 Intel Xeon 5410 LFF Server System - $1,200
- Quad-Core Intel Xeon Processor E5410 (2.33 GHz)
- 1 GB (2 x 512 MB) (probably throw away or use in some other system)
- Smart Array E200i Controller with 128MB cache (RAID 0/1/1+0/5)
- Embedded Single NC373i Multifunction Gigabit NIC
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16859105397

4x SAMSUNG Spinpoint F1 HD103UJ 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - $697.96 ($174.49 each)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822152102

2x Kingston 4GB 240-Pin DDR2 FB-DIMM DDR2 667 (PC2 5300) ECC Fully Buffered - $459.98 ($229.99 each)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820134620

1x Microsoft Windows Server Standard 2008 32Bit/x64 English 1pk DSP OEI DVD 1-4CPU 5 Clt w/Hyper V - $679.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16832116452

3x Microsoft R18-02907 Windows Server CAL 2008 English 1pk DSP OEI 5 Clt User CAL - $419.97 ($139.99 each)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16832116453

1x APC SC1500 1440 VA 865 Watts Smart-UPS SC 1500VA 120V - 2U Rackmount/Tower - $380.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16842101142

For a total of $3,838.88


anything I am missing?
anything incompatible?
anything I should add / do different?
I can easily go above this price ... the quote from the IT company was $7,000




I have no ideas yet for the off-site backup. A subsidiary of the company has a remote location. Maybe a secure share there and then some form of P2P software to sync?

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: coolVariable
Buying the parts for a server for a small film company with 18 employees (might grow to 30 over the next 2 years).
The primary use for the system is as a file server with different permissions.

I am totally open for suggestions.
The company received a bid from an IT company but a very quick and dirty price check on Newegg showed that they charged approximately 200% of the newegg price.

Based on their suggestions, I am looking at the following:

1x Microsoft Windows Server Standard 2008 32Bit/x64 English 1pk DSP OEI DVD 1-4CPU 5 Clt w/Hyper V - $679.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16832116452

3x Microsoft R18-02907 Windows Server CAL 2008 English 1pk DSP OEI 5 Clt User CAL - $419.97 ($139.99 each)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16832116453

anything I am missing?
anything I should add / do different?
I can easily go above this price ... the quote from the IT company was $7,000

I have no ideas yet for the off-site backup. A subsidiary of the company has a remote location. Maybe a secure share there and then some form of P2P software to sync?

1. Their "200% over NE" price includes setup and some term of service, correct?
2. Have you considered a Linux based server?
3. Have you considered Dell servers?

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: Blain

1. Their "200% over NE" price includes setup and some term of service, correct?
2. Have you considered a Linux based server?
3. Have you considered Dell servers?

Quick responses:
#1 No. This is hardware only. They would then set up our hardware purchase.
#2 Windows is easier to manage - otherwise I would probably go with linux.
#3 Which one would you recommend there? Dell seemed to be more expensive then the newegg self-build.

 

[lxskllr]

I can't help with the hardware, but now would be a good time to give Linux a try. You already have a server that works, so you could setup a parallel server with Linux for testing. A file server should be fairly simple software wise, and if it works out, it could save the company a fair amount of money in the long term. If it doesn't work, nothing was spent, and you can then purchase Windows licenses.

 

[RebateMonger]

I think that a RAID 10 array is a good idea, but you may want to just go RAID 1. I'm setting up a new file server for a client and we're actually just using multiple 1TB RAID 1 arrays because it's easier to upgrade the hard drives to 2TB in two years. You only have to switch 2 drives at a time, rather than four drives. (Plus a hot-swap drive the first time). I recommend not making any volume larger than 1TB, since that's the size of the largest single hard drives for backups right now. And if you've ever run a "chkdsk" or tried doing data recovery on a 1 TB array, you won't want to have a 2 TB array. It takes "forever" to do operations on an array that size.

For a first Windows server, at this time I'd recommend Microsoft Small Business Server 2003, unless you have specific reasons to want 2008. SBS 2008 hasn't been released, and it costs a LOT more than SBS 2003. Most 17-person companies would be very happy with an SBS 2003 server for several years. It provides a LOT more business features than a standard Windows server (non-SBS), and makes a fine file server, too. I would never use straight Windows Server 2003/2008 as the only server in a company that size.

I'd put 2 or 4 GB in the server if you get SBS.

Backup is getting tougher with these "large" arrays. I put in a separate hot-swap SATA card (Silicon Image 3132 chipset is reliable) and use a hot-swap SATA carrier to swap out 1 TB SATA hard drives. Have them keep at least two drives (each holding backups of the entire server) offsite and swap them out on an appropriate basis. I'd purchase four backup drives to begin.

By the time your client fills up a 1TB data array, you can start buying 1.5 TB backup drives and switch to 2 TB backup (and main) drives later. You can make use the "used" 1 TB for archival backups, for replacement drives in your client's PCs, and to build one or two Windows Home Servers for making automated backups of all the client PCs.

Doing it as described gives you mirrored arrays that meet their data capacity, gives you an upgrade plan to at least double your storage and backup capacity, and gives them a server that should meet their needs for several years.

Originally posted by: coolVariable
I am thinking about a RAID10 setup of 1TB drives since that provides plenty of space (2TB), on-site backup and pretty good speeds.

Any kind of RAID array is near-worthless as a backup. It doesn't guard from many common data-loss scenarios and it seldom seems to function like in the textbooks. I see a LOT of double-drive failures in RAID arrays, either through accident or negligence. Separate backups are the key to minimizing the consequences of drive failures.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I think you could do better building the server

Supermicro dual 771 board $260
2x E5410's $340
Lian Li Case $240
OCZ 800W PS $130 AR
3ware raid controller $330

That's $1300, $100 more than the HP and it's twice the box

Double the cores, better 256mb raid card, dual gigabit nic, better case, better power supply


And I would go with this ram
Adata ddr2-800 buffered fully registered 2x2gb $155
cheaper and faster

 

[coolVariable]

I don't think I have the time to totally build my own ... even if it is a lot more powerful.
I would love to get a Dell (easy with the warranty and service) but am not sure which server would be good from them ... all the ones I configured came out much more expensive (even more expensive then the IT company suggestion) ... more like $10k+

Not sure how you can get a comparable server with RAID10 and 4x1TB for a price similar to mine from Dell ...

 

[bob4432]

just know - you build it, maintain it, it goes down, so do you. imho, let a dedicated it company take care of it.

 

[TheKub]

Originally posted by: coolVariable
I am thinking about a RAID10 setup of 1TB drives since that provides plenty of space (2TB), on-site backup and pretty good speeds.

RAID is not a backup. Yes, it will save you in the event that you lose a drive, but if you lose the server (flood\fire\theft\etc) or a virus\someone accidentally hits the delete key you can be SOL. You can buy yourself some protection by enabling volume shadow copy but I would be extremely hesitant to rely on it as my only form of "backup".

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: TheKub

Originally posted by: coolVariable
I am thinking about a RAID10 setup of 1TB drives since that provides plenty of space (2TB), on-site backup and pretty good speeds.

RAID is not a backup. Yes, it will save you in the event that you lose a drive, but if you lose the server (flood\fire\theft\etc) or a virus\someone accidentally hits the delete key you can be SOL. You can buy yourself some protection by enabling volume shadow copy but I would be extremely hesitant to rely on it as my only form of "backup".

That's why we are also going to have off site backup.
Although, I have not yet heard any good proposals how this can be achieved without physically moving drives around.

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: bob4432
just know - you build it, maintain it, it goes down, so do you. imho, let a dedicated it company take care of it.

We are buying and then a dedicated company will configure and maintain.
Their hardware prices are only ridiculous.
so my initial setup above (see post #1) works best?

 

[TheKub]

Originally posted by: coolVariable
That's why we are also going to have off site backup.
Although, I have not yet heard any good proposals how this can be achieved without physically moving drives around.

Probably because for 500+ GB of data the only reasonable option is tape. I believe you are beyond the threshold of an online service unless this company has a large internet connection. I wouldn't want to tell a customer "Ok I started downloading the latest backup and Ill be back in 2-3 days when its done downloading to get you guys back up and running".

Also, for a production system I would not install SATA drives. SAS would be the direction I would look.

 

[TheKub]

Originally posted by: coolVariable
Their hardware prices are only ridiculous.

Care to post their quote? Im just curious to what they are proposing.

 

[JackMDS]

I think that your original idea + adjustment as posted by Rebate Monger is the way to go.

Enthusiasts have the tendency to apply their Gaming Power Hunger to Networking and server.
It really does not work this way. file server does not need super power.

 

[coolVariable]

RAID10, RAID1, SATA or SAS?

I am torn between going RAID10 with SATA drives or RAID1 with SATA or SAS.

SAS is better with multithreading.
SAS drives also costs 2x to 3x the amount of SATA drives.

RAID10 vs. RAID1 would give me better speed.

I thought doing RAID10 with SATA should be close to the speed of RAID1 with SAS.

It's not THAT many people accessing files all the time. Mostly archiving documents, PDFs, graphics, powerpoints and Video DVD images.


Windows Server: 2008 Standard vs. SBS 2003

I absolutely have no preference. 2008 Standard did not seem THAT expensive on Newegg ($679.99 http://www.newegg.com/Product/...?Item=N82E16832116452). I might ask the IT co. why they suggest 2008 standard over SBS 2003. Want to get the hardware figured out first though.


IT Co. Bid

Here is the price to beat:

HP Proliant ML 150 Server, Quad Core Xeon 2.33 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 10/100/1000 NIC, E200 Smart Array Controller, DVD-ROM, Tower $1,635
2 GB RAM Upgrade Kit $172
HP 1 TB 3G SATA Hot Pluggable Hard Drive 4x$700 = $2,800
Windows 2008 Server Standard - Open Business License $701
Windows 2008 User CAL - Open Business License 15x$28 = $420
APC Smart-UPS 1500 VA Uninterrupted Power Supply $501

 

[RebateMonger]

RAID 10 should give better drive transfers than RAID 1, but a good RAID 1 card will minimize that advantage. But as a file server, your transfers are going to be limited by your network and not by your drive speed. Networked users will never notice the difference between RAID 10 and RAID 1 when you are using the server as a file server.

For the same reason, I think that SAS in this application is a waste of money.

As far as SBS versus Standard Server 2003/2008, have the owner look at Microsoft's web pages for SBS 2003 and see if he/she thinks that SBS' features will be useful. It's awful hard to go over the feature list and not find SOMETHING that gets the response, "Wow. That'd be cool." SBS 2003, Standard Edition, and Server 2008, Standard Edition, will cost about the same for 17 users, but SBS includes Exchange Server and tons of other business features.

Don't let any of this stuff get ordered without a backup system and antivirus/antispam for the entire office. Too many people put it off and it never happens. That's when I get called to recover their data.

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: RebateMonger
RAID 10 should give better drive transfers than RAID 1, but a good RAID 1 card will minimize that advantage. But as a file server, your transfers are going to be limited by your network and not by your drive speed. Networked users will never notice the difference between RAID 10 and RAID 1 when you are using the server as a file server.

For the same reason, I think that SAS in this application is a waste of money.

As far as SBS versus Standard Server 2003/2008, have the owner look at Microsoft's web pages for SBS 2003 and see if he/she thinks that SBS' features will be useful. It's awful hard to go over the feature list and not find SOMETHING that gets the response, "Wow. That'd be cool." SBS 2003, Standard Edition, and Server 2008, Standard Edition, will cost about the same for 17 users, but SBS includes Exchange Server and tons of other business features.

Don't let any of this stuff get ordered without a backup system and antivirus/antispam for the entire office. Too many people put it off and it never happens. That's when I get called to recover their data.

Mmmmh. SBS 2003 doesn't have exchange 2007 though ...
I think the co. will stick with hosted exchange anyhow.
I will see if the IT provider can get us to buy SBS 2008 now, SBS 2003 gets installed first and we get the upgrade to 2008 SBS for free in November.

Any opinions though on 32bit vs. 64bit for the server OS? (if we go with SBS 2008 or Server 2008 Standard)

 

[RebateMonger]

No choice with SBS. SBS 2003 is 32-bit only. SBS 2008 is 64-bit only.

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: RebateMonger
No choice with SBS. SBS 2003 is 32-bit only. SBS 2008 is 64-bit only.

Cool. Thank you.
You really are an expert.
I greatly appreciate all your help.