Server junkies -- little help with deciding on new BBS server?

i would consider Option 2. Raid 1 is the mirroring/back up in real time right? That could save some headaches in the future. 15k RPM drives are great, but I don't think disk speed is an issue when I surf the BBS.

 

I agree with option 2. Raid 1 is great for servers.

 

Which option has that new open source Idiot Filter for use with the GARM? I'm all for that one.

 

I would think "long-term option" would be best... I would go with the $120, because as much as so many people getting on the box [especially on the GARM] when my Rockets lose to come in and bash our players will get expensive... since we're going to b*tch about McGrady even more.

Long-term, I'd go with more JUICE. When the owners of the boxes get cheaper, demand that they give you a better deal. Plus, Raid 1 will save Our Rockets.

It's "its." Hey, it's the Hangout, sir... you're fair game.

 

I was going to say the exact same thing. I think having RAID is pretty important.

 

Holly cow, they are charging a lot for mirroring. I guess they figure you have to have it.

Do you get to install your own OS? If so, can you add a drive without the raid 1 option? The reason I asking this is because SW raid 1 in most cases runs just as well as hardware RAID 1 and doesn't require any proprietary meta data on the drive. SW RAID is part of Linux and every other modern OS.

 

I would also go with option 2.


the bigger question for me is if/when the upgrade does go through does that mean there will be extended BBS downtime????

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

IMO, make sure its a hardware raid 1. Headaches only continue when your software raid for Linux goes awry. We used to run Linux software raids, but the performance was nothing compared to a hardware raid card with expandable memory. As the others said, option 2 would be your best bet, but make sure it has additional slots for more memory in the future (im pretty sure it will and you're planning on that already). We run high load read/write MySQL databases here and 16GB is essential to mysql performance.

 

whatever to all those options, I want the BBS servers to be in an underground nuclear proof bunker, maybe in Cheyenne Mountain at NORAD.

#2

 

Clutch,

Just wanted to throw this out there with respect to your RAID option.

10K vs 15K is a no-brainer, in terms of speed. Probably not worth it as this site is most likely more write intensive.

However, if you have any input into your drive layouts, it would help increase the performance of the BBS. Ex. RAID 1 is great for redundancy, and it's great for writes (which this BBS is probably 90%+ of). But it's not as efficient for reads and indexes. To help increase the indexing and searching functions of your back-end DB, RAID 5 offers you the best balance of read/write perf. RAID 5 is expensive though, so a good compromise is RAID 1+0. Actually, there's an industry shift, albeit grudingly and slowly, to RAID 1+0 vs. RAID 5. Of course this usually only counts for higher end storage systems that spread load across spindles anyway.

Anyway, I don't know if they offer you any wiggle room with respect to your configuration, but drive layout is one of the biggest performance obstacles that most people tend to overlook.

With all that said, if those are your only options, Option #2 is your best bang for the buck, as I don't think the extra money is worth going from 10K to 15K drives for this BBS.

 

My understanding of RAID is that it is used for redundancy for hard drives. What would be the point in using software RAID? If the drive craps, then what?

I haven't been in network support in years so maybe I'm just behind but it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.

 

Good work Clutch, much appreciated...

 

Personally, I would choose either one of these servers.



And yes, I am a server junkie.

 

RAID 5 is cheaper than RAID 1+0. If server performance is a major issue and disk cost is relatively a minor concern, definitely go with RAID 1+0.

 

I am sorry but coma is wrong. RAID 1 has everything to do with redundancy (data protection) and very little with speed. RAID 0 has the best read and write performances. RAID 5 is good on read, but poor on write.

 

wrong forum