FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-26-2012, 01:40 PM
Rafał Radecki
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

Hi all.

I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
would like to use in our server infrastructure.
The platform should have:
- possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
- at least 6 SATA ports;
- the possibility to use SAS disks;
- at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
- size of 2 or 3U;
- hot swap for disks.
We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
All servers will be based on CentOS5/6

Best regards,
Rafal Radecki.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 02:03 PM
John Doe
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

From: Rafał Radecki <radecki.rafal@gmail.com>

> We are looking for something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.


Something reliable, good and not expensive... hum... We all do!

But quite a few people recommend Supermicro.


JD

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 02:15 PM
John R Pierce
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

On 06/26/12 6:40 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;

if the system supports SAS disks, you don't need any SATA ports. you can
plug SATA drives into SAS hotswap bays with most any SAS controllers.



--
john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 02:37 PM
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

Hi, Rafal,

Rafał Radecki wrote:
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another
> one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6

Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
fine.

Btw, all the above are 1U, have 3 hot swap bays, and are all SATA. Their
support has been quite decent.

More expensive, Dell. An R41x, R61x, or, for heavy duty work, an R81x, are
really serious, the last two take eight, I think, SAS drives (the small
ones - 2.5"?). Their service is outstanding.

*All* of the above, both Dell and Penguin, have two NICs. All will take
well beyond 64G of memory (we have a Penguin Altus 1804 and a Dell R815, I
think it is, with (excuse me, my mind SEGVs every time I think of this)
250G of memory....

Under no circumstances should you buy Sun/Oracle. Service... here in the
Washington, DC area, about a year and a half ago, it took me a MONTH to
get one server fixed w/ on-site support. They're there to make a profit -
I mean, how do you *think* Larry Ellison pays for his fighter jet, yacht,
and Hawaiian island? - *NOT* to sell you hardware and service that serves
your purposes.

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 02:38 PM
Ken godee
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

> From: Rafał Radecki <radecki.rafal@gmail.com>
>
>> We are looking for something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
>

I'd add a few more things to the list.....

Redundant power supplies
dual gig nics
"dual" quad core cpu's
raid support w/battery backed cache
remote management

pick up a 2nd(err..3rd) generation HP DL380G5

There's a lot of equipment around
and can be had for a good price.

Save enough to even pick up a second one
and keep on site for R&D and equipment/parts backup.






_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 02:38 PM
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
> Hi, Rafal,
>
> Rafał Radecki wrote:
>>
>> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
>> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
>> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
>> The platform should have:
>> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
>> - at least 6 SATA ports;
>> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
>> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add
>> another
>> one;
>> - size of 2 or 3U;
>> - hot swap for disks.
>> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
>> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
>> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
>> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
>> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
>> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
>> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
>> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6
>
> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
> fine.
>
> Btw, all the above are 1U, have 3 hot swap bays, and are all SATA. Their
> support has been quite decent.
>
> More expensive, Dell. An R41x, R61x, or, for heavy duty work, an R81x, are
> really serious, the last two take eight, I think, SAS drives (the small
> ones - 2.5"?). Their service is outstanding.
>
> *All* of the above, both Dell and Penguin, have two NICs. All will take
> well beyond 64G of memory (we have a Penguin Altus 1804 and a Dell R815, I
> think it is, with (excuse me, my mind SEGVs every time I think of this)
> 250G of memory....
>
> Under no circumstances should you buy Sun/Oracle. Service... here in the
> Washington, DC area, about a year and a half ago, it took me a MONTH to
> get one server fixed w/ on-site support. They're there to make a profit -
> I mean, how do you *think* Larry Ellison pays for his fighter jet, yacht,
> and Hawaiian island? - *NOT* to sell you hardware and service that serves
> your purposes.

Sorry, need to follow myself up: *just* after I hit <send>, I forgot the
obvious disclaimer: I have no idea what any of these folks are allowed to
export to Poland.

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 05:30 PM
John R Pierce
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

On 06/26/12 7:37 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
> fine.

The SuperMicro Intel stuff seems just fine. I'd be more leary of AMD.

--
john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 05:39 PM
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

John R Pierce wrote:
> On 06/26/12 7:37 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
>> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
>> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
>> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
>> fine.
>
> The SuperMicro Intel stuff seems just fine. I'd be more leary of AMD.

We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
motherboard. In fact, I just got the pass, and asked the secretary to call
Fed Ex today to ship another one back to the vendor.

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 07:03 PM
Steve Thompson
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:

> We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
> motherboard.

I too have had bad experiences with SuperMicro motherboards; never had one
last more than three years.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 06-26-2012, 07:08 PM
Eero Volotinen
 
Default Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

2012/6/26 Rafał Radecki <radecki.rafal@gmail.com>:
> Hi all.
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6

Dell?

Something like Dell Poweredge R710 ?

--
Eero
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:58 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org