Hardware for server, mid to high performance range.

[trevorhaywire]

Hi Guys

I am developing a restaurant bookings app which is going to be launched soon. I need to build a server to host the data in MySQL tables and do the corresponding computations to send the relevant data to the app. Though initial hits to the server are gonna be low, I'm expecting the server machine to be able to handle at least 100 requests per second at peak times. These requests include the user asking to show near-by restaurants based on location, request to download high res images to restaurant and its menu and also to book a table at a restaurant. I want your help to decide what would be the ideal:
motherboard,
processor,
memory,
storage space,
raid configuration,
capacity of ups (uninterrupted power supply),
network bandwidth,
etc., that is needed to build a server system according to above specifications. Since I have limited resources currently, I would perfer a system that does not burn a hole in the pocket unnecessarily, but serve the requirements.

Thank you.
-Trev

 

[Essence_of_War]

I would start with an AWS/Azure/whatever instance. Buying a server with no one using the app yet seems like putting the cart before the horse.

 

[trevorhaywire]

I would start with an AWS/Azure/whatever instance. Buying a server with no one using the app yet seems like putting the cart before the horse.

I understand what you are saying. But I already have a potential list of customers signed up, so there will definitely be traffic from day 1. The thing is, I want to build my own server instead of going for cloud services, so please suggest what kind of system would fit the bill here. Thanks.

 

[Squeetard]

Don't build a server. Buy an enterprise class server in tower or rack.

 

[trevorhaywire]

Don't build a server. Buy an enterprise class server in tower or rack.

I wanted to build a server on my own since I came to know that it would be a great cost saving measure. But if I can get a enterprise class server at a reasonable cost, I would like to choose that option. Can you please point me to the hardware required for my use case? Thanks.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I wanted to build a server on my own since I came to know that it would be a great cost saving measure. But if I can get a enterprise class server at a reasonable cost, I would like to choose that option. Can you please point me to the hardware required for my use case? Thanks.

Any 1U server from Dell/HP/Lenovo should have enough oomph when properly configured.

You mention MySQL - database applications are often RAM and IOPS-constrained., so gobs of RAM and the storage system are most important. Even if you BYO-server, you're presumably hosting/colocating it in a datacenter - you may wish to lease storage space from them rather than equipping your server with your own drives.

Likewise, you may with to lease the use of the colo's database server (clustered/backed up) rather than have your server be a single point of failure.

Since you're developing the application, it's up to you to simulate load and figure out what kind of RAM/IOPS you're going to need to be able to swing. That will figure into either how you equip the server, or translate directly to your colo costs if you lease storage/DB.

Finally, how important is uptime here? Are there any SLA agreements with the restaurants? You may need more than one server for clustering/failover/loadbalancing?

I am paranoid for work, so I'd probably get two CPU-heavy 1U servers for relatively cheap, build a cluster with failover, and lease SAN/Database connections from the CoLo.

 

[Ketchup]

Very good suggestions by dave. Also, what is your budget going to be like?

As others have mentioned, you probably want to buy, not build. This isn't your typical desktop.

For reference, price up the parts from here:
http://www.newegg.com/Servers-Workstations/Category/ID-271

And compare that with the cost of just buying a ready-to-g unit. You are going to have enough to do with drives, RAID, OS, and software that even with a pre-buit server you would have plenty to worry about.

 

[Viper GTS]

Even with customers already lined up AWS is where this should be. AWS gives you the ability to walk away if things don't go as planned - You simply shut it down and your costs stop.

There is far more to hosting a service than having a physical box, with AWS you get everything in one shot - Colo space, power, internet connectivity, redundancy, backups, scalability (if your service explodes can you build 10 more servers overnight? AWS can do it in minutes), and much more.

In order of preference building sits way below buying, which is equally below AWS.

Viper GTS

 

[mfenn]

Even with customers already lined up AWS is where this should be. AWS gives you the ability to walk away if things don't go as planned - You simply shut it down and your costs stop.

There is far more to hosting a service than having a physical box, with AWS you get everything in one shot - Colo space, power, internet connectivity, redundancy, backups, scalability (if your service explodes can you build 10 more servers overnight? AWS can do it in minutes), and much more.

In order of preference building sits way below buying, which is equally below AWS.

Viper GTS

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

If you're looking at a business seriously as a business, there is no reason not to go for AWS (or another cloud provider like Rackspace, Digital Ocean, Azure, etc.). You have to be fairly large before having your own servers in a colo begins to make sense.

 

[Essence_of_War]

I understand what you are saying. But I already have a potential list of customers signed up, so there will definitely be traffic from day 1. The thing is, I want to build my own server instead of going for cloud services, so please suggest what kind of system would fit the bill here. Thanks.

Have they given you money yet? Have they signed contracts to give you money for enough time that you won't be in deep trouble paying your monthly co-lo rents/fees if they dry up?

There is a reason why people use AWS/Azure/Joyent and what have you. It is easy to spin up machines, it's easy to spin them down, and the price structure is transparent. Someone else is solving all of the annoying problems so you can just focus on the things that actually matter to your business. If your server dies in the middle of the night while you're working on coding up app version X.Y.Z and simultaneously trying to get some more restaurants on board with paying you 9.99 a month or whatever to make sure their potential customers are seeing them on your booking app, do you really want to be doing your own troubleshooting? If you use a cloud provider that stuff is abstracted away by their layers of redundancy, if you buy a pre-built unit, that is abstracted away by your next-day service contract, if you build your own, YOU are on the hook.

 

[KentState]

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

If you're looking at a business seriously as a business, there is no reason not to go for AWS (or another cloud provider like Rackspace, Digital Ocean, Azure, etc.). You have to be fairly large before having your own servers in a colo begins to make sense.

Hell, even large businesses are going this route. Unless your core competency is running a server farm, leave it a company that does it all day. I have personally worked with a number of top 200 and 100 internet retailers that are going this route.

The other nice part about AWS for my experience is being able to easily bill clients. You can categorize and summarize the services so that you get a nice itemized readout which helps manage costs.

 

[Burpo]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BRAND-NEW-L...068?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f4f12e554