Q: I am building a server from the second box listed in my sig. I want to go the SCSI I think. Heres the things Im going to do:
1) running a web server with a static IP and use Apache2
2) hosting a Samba share (with linux)
3) Sometimes host any game
I am running (or planning runs) for Mandrake 9.1. What do you think I should do with the hard drives? Should I purchase a SCSI controller card, and 1 or 2 SCSI disks? If so, what would you recommend the hardware and I need RAID or just plain ol SCSI? I have an extra 80 gig WD SE sitting around, but I heard that access to files (7,200 rpm) would not be fast enough?
I should also take into account driver compatibility with Mandrake 9.1 (which I have to make damn good)
THanks much!
Jared
Re:Jared,
I think the use of a RAID array is dependant on how critical the data is, and how diligent you are about backing up. If you install a second drive, and write a script (cron job) that backs up directories on a schedule, then it would take a double drive failure to lose your data, and you could do all that with relatively inexpensive IDE drives and the onboard controller.
I have a webserver set up that way, and lost a drive recently. I had to go to the remote location and reboot the server, with the backup drive as primary, and I was back in business with very little data lost. It was not as seamless as a RAID array recovery, but I did not have the big bucks to spend on that;)
I have an extra 80 gig WD SE sitting around but I heard that file access on it (7200rpm) wouldn't be fast enough?
It will be plenty fast. consider that you want to write to your drive from the server. You cannot write data to your own drive faster than the server can send it to you, if your regular machine has similar drives. The only time a fast scsi drive would help is if several folks were accessing big bunches of files at the same time.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
I sounded rude in that post.Correction, not just in that post.
what do you mean? was i rude in my correction too??
i was just trying to help that guy out. i do think there are better people to give him answers inthe other forums.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
I sounded rude in that post.Correction, not just in that post.
Re:lol good 'save'
I sounded rude in that post. I meant to imply that there would be more success wiht responses in the other forum.
Re:So, to setup the *network* (trying to save you here) between the I/O ports and the selected hard drives, you must chose an interface that falls within your budget.
If you have priced out SCSI, including the drives, as well as having confirmed the SCSI controller is compatible with your motherboard and Mandrake, then go with SCSI if you can afford it. It is technically better then IDE, with regards to scalability, (history shows) reliability, and often performance if you get a fast controller and hard drive.
Based on the information supplied, and further assuming that it appears as though this server would be setup for recreational purproses, you could easily get away with one 80GB WD 8MB cache IDE drive. Furthermore, it all really boils down to how critical the data on the server would be. If the one HD fails, you are SOL. If you have RAID 1 and two of the same hard drives based on IDE, you should be fine. If you have one or two SCSI hard drives, and the one containing your data fails without having backed up any of the data, you are SOL. But, of course, if you have SCSI controller with RAID 1 activated with two (perferrably) identical drives, you will be fine.
In summary:
IDE/ATA133 & One fast HD = No redundancy (drive fails – data gondee), pretty good speed.
IDE RAID 1 & Two fast HD's = Redundancy, and possible small performance hit, probably negligible though.
SCSI & 1 HD = Depending on the one of 100's of different variations, controllers, and hard drives, it could be a bit faster if you spend the big bucks, but you will have no redundancy.
… you get the picture.
Good luck!
Re:I think you are in the wrong forum for this.
try general hardware.
0 Comments.