May 20, 2008

The Server I wish they made

Writing about web page http://www.apple.com/uk/xserve

While most houses are happy with a laptop or a desktop or perhaps both, I’m generally not. I don’t trust myself to always make regular backups (hence I think Apple’s Time Machine is a good invention for me), nor do I trust single hardware with all my life on it not to fail. In fact my Archive/Backup NAS just last week decided to fail and I may have lost all my work I did at uni. Fortunately I think I have a set of CDs stashed away with it on, but I can’t be sure until I get to Sussex to check. I also like the idea of shared things and things that I can access from anywhere. I like centralised redundant data storage and meaty appliances that let me share information at will. So my home will need a server. Not one of those Microsoft nancy home server jobbies but a proper, decent spec server that allows me to monitor things. Is it overkill? Probably. Is it fun? Of course it is. Does it allow me to do things I couldn’t otherwise? Of course.

So what is the ideal server for me? Well it’s got to be rack mounted and I’d like it to run OS X (File server and Web server), Windows (Exchange) and Solaris (Database Server). This of course points to an XServe as the only real option, and it’s a damn good 1u server at that. The only thing that I wish it had that it doesn’t is the use of 2.5” drives instead of 3.5” drives. I want to be able to have a RAID-1 pair of SAS drives running the operating systems with a nice 4 disk RAID-6 for the data. To do that on an HP DL380 G5 is easy and I’d even have a couple of bays spare. On a DL360 G5 I’d be ok too. On the XServe I only have three bays though and that limits my storage capability. I was happy with the idea of an XServe RAID but they discontinued it, and I’m not paying £7k for the Promise replacement idea because I just don’t need 16 drives. All I want is an XServe in 1u with 6 drive bays and 2.5” drives. Make it so Apple, make it so.


- 2 comments by 1 or more people Not publicly viewable

  1. Rob

    Why would you want 4 disk Raid-6?, surely there’s only a point in getting Raid-6 if you intend on having 5 or more drives. Wouldn’t Raid 10 (much faster) or simply Raid 1 be good enough. Raid-6 would only increase the Rebuild time and would make things more complex unless use more than 4 drives. Unless of course you mean Raid-5, in which case ignore this completely.

    Correct me if I’m wrong.

    20 May 2008, 22:54

  2. Christopher Hinds

    Nope I can’t type – meant RAID-5, though as you say 10 would be quicker for that number of disks.

    21 May 2008, 06:17


Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

Trackbacks

May 2008

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Apr |  Today  | Jun
         1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31   

Search this blog

Tags

Galleries

Most recent comments

  • Actually, it could have been as little as one to two minutes fast. by Sue on this entry
  • Your clocks at least two minutes ahead of mine, Christopher (Name) by Sue on this entry
  • Nope I can’t type – meant RAID–5, though as you say 10 … by Christopher Hinds on this entry
  • Why would you want 4 disk Raid–6?, surely there’s only a poin… by Rob on this entry
  • 20 minutes flying time is gauranteed. by Sue on this entry

Blog archive

Loading…
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXII