Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
That's not a reason to care about the form factor.
Basically what I was getting at was you only care about cost/performance. As such dropping it the stated need for LFF keeps your options more open. As noted you will likely end up with LFF drives because price/performance are at an acceptable level compared to other options.
Stipulating LFF does nothing but limit options needlessly.
Says the guy who's not at the mercy of a management team who only sees "the number of beans" and "the cost of the beans"...
We are all under the same scrutiny. Everyone who works in IT.
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dustinb3403 said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Well I would agree, you have to chose the literal best fiscally viable option that meets the requirements. If LFF drives come in cheaper, even by a little, while meeting every other requirement (IOPS) then what does it matter that the drives aren't SFF?
It's cheaper and performs the same or better. If it cost the same and performed worse than you would have something to stand on.
Yeah, the difference in price was literally thousands of dollars when we spec'd out a same model server with 2.5" drives vs 3.5" drives (especially since the biggest drive they offer in the 2.5" size is 2TB - it takes a lot more of 'em to reach 18TB of usable space).
There is a huge difference other than just cost between these as well - IOPs. of course at these prices you need to compare the price of SFF in RAID 10 vs SSD in RAID 5.
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
That's not a reason to care about the form factor.
Basically what I was getting at was you only care about cost/performance. As such dropping it the stated need for LFF keeps your options more open. As noted you will likely end up with LFF drives because price/performance are at an acceptable level compared to other options.
Stipulating LFF does nothing but limit options needlessly.
Says the guy who's not at the mercy of a management team who only sees "the number of beans" and "the cost of the beans"...
You're missing what I'm saying. You're listing a specification because today it's the best price. What I'm saying is that the only specification you should be listing is - it must be the best price for what fits my requirements. That type of specification will ensure you always get the best solution. Saying you need LFF is as @scottalanmiller would say, is a red herring. It's not what's important, correct cost for end goal is what's important.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
That's not a reason to care about the form factor.
Basically what I was getting at was you only care about cost/performance. As such dropping it the stated need for LFF keeps your options more open. As noted you will likely end up with LFF drives because price/performance are at an acceptable level compared to other options.
Stipulating LFF does nothing but limit options needlessly.
Says the guy who's not at the mercy of a management team who only sees "the number of beans" and "the cost of the beans"...
We are all under the same scrutiny. Everyone who works in IT.
Exactly. It's ridiculous that the bean counters are even really involved. It costs what it costs to do things correctly. It's your job in IT to research what that solution is. Your research, we assume, has shown that you will get the needed IOPs and capacity in an 8 drive LFF RAID 10 array at the lowest price - compared to an 18 drive SFF RAID 10 array.
Now - again, the 18 drive array will likely have more than 2x the IOPs than the 8 drive array, and faster seek times - two factors that could significantly increase performance over the fewer drive array.
Of course these are all factors you've already considered, so we assume they don't matter at this time. -
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
That's not a reason to care about the form factor.
Basically what I was getting at was you only care about cost/performance. As such dropping it the stated need for LFF keeps your options more open. As noted you will likely end up with LFF drives because price/performance are at an acceptable level compared to other options.
Stipulating LFF does nothing but limit options needlessly.
Says the guy who's not at the mercy of a management team who only sees "the number of beans" and "the cost of the beans"...
Why would the bean counters care about the number of beans? That seems like a weeds thing they shouldn't know about or care about. When I present a cost to management I say the server will cost x, not - all these parts will cost x... give them only as much information as they absolutely need to give the OK. Giving them more allows them to get lost in the weeds about things they don't understand or care about.
-
Looks like you're stuck trying to find a 520 then... or you'll have to spend the extra beans on a 720 if you can't find one.
That's a lot of storage, and I agree trying to get that in 2.5" form factor is hard.
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
I'm uncertain about which RAID controller to go with. These are the three to choose from:
- PERC H310 Mini Mono Controller
- PERC H710 Controller with 512MB NV Cache
- PERC H710P Controller with 1GB NV Cache
I'm not sure there would actually be any significant benefit in getting the 1GB NV card vs the Mini Mono...
Here's the build I'm considering now:
Dell PowerEdge R520 8x3.5 2U Rack Server (1 CPU Version) w/xByte Warranty
Intel Xeon E5-2407v2 2.4GHz/10M/1333MHz 4-Core 80W
Dell PE R520/R320 Heat Sink
Dell 4GB DDR3 ECC Reg (3)
PERC H310 Mini Mono Controller (RAID 0/1/5/10/50)
RAID 10
6TB 7.2K 3.5" 12Gbps NL SAS Hard Drive (Dell Enterprise) (8)
Broadcom 5720 Quad Port Gigabit Ethernet
iDRAC7 Enterprise
Dell 2U Sliding Ready Rails
2x Dell 750W Power Supply
Windows Svr 2012 R2 Standard x64 English
3 Year Limited WarrantyShould I consider upgrading to the 1100W PSUs for an additional $60?
Big RAID cards are almost always the way to go. The cache makes a huge difference. And those anemic H310 units are always to be skipped.
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender LOL, that's an upgrade for us! We're still running Server 2008 R2 on almost every server in our fleet!
Might be an upgrade, but why deploy anything new that isn't current? Why take the time and effort to deploy old software?
-
@tim_g said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Dangit! The sales guy at xByte said "We don't have any 520 servers in stock, and I don't think we'll be getting any - we haven't had any in several months. They were not mass produced like the 720s were..."
Then get the same build, but in a 620 or possibly 420. I'm sure the price difference is minimal, maybe even less. Actually I'm not sure if those servers will allow that drive configuration. I can't remember without looking.
He needs the 520 or 720 to hold the drives, 420 and 620 are 1U.
-
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@coliver said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Any reason to need 2U? Just the drive configuration? Or was there something else?
Main reason is storage. We need at least 18TB usable, and we want it in the 3.5" form factor.
Why does storage form factor matter?
How do you do what he needs with 2.5"?
-
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
OK, so it's not that you care about form factor, it's that you care about cost.
How 'bout we say that I "care about form factor because of cost..." ?
That's not a reason to care about the form factor.
Basically what I was getting at was you only care about cost/performance. As such dropping the stated need for LFF keeps your options more open. As noted you will likely end up with LFF drives because price/performance are at an acceptable level compared to other options.
Stipulating LFF does nothing but limit options needlessly.
Right and because of cost/performance nothing but 3.5" drives can be considered.
-
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@dustinb3403 said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Well I would agree, you have to chose the literal best fiscally viable option that meets the requirements. If LFF drives come in cheaper, even by a little, while meeting every other requirement (IOPS) then what does it matter that the drives aren't SFF?
It's cheaper and performs the same or better. If it cost the same and performed worse than you would have something to stand on.
Yeah, the difference in price was literally thousands of dollars when we spec'd out a same model server with 2.5" drives vs 3.5" drives (especially since the biggest drive they offer in the 2.5" size is 2TB - it takes a lot more of 'em to reach 18TB of usable space).
There is a huge difference other than just cost between these as well - IOPs. of course at these prices you need to compare the price of SFF in RAID 10 vs SSD in RAID 5.
Right and 3.5" drives have better IOPS than their 2.5" partners. So you get more capacity AND faster drives (just barely) with the larger form factor.
-
@tim_g said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Looks like you're stuck trying to find a 520 then... or you'll have to spend the extra beans on a 720 if you can't find one.
That's a lot of storage, and I agree trying to get that in 2.5" form factor is hard.
Or move to SuperMicro.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@tim_g said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Looks like you're stuck trying to find a 520 then... or you'll have to spend the extra beans on a 720 if you can't find one.
That's a lot of storage, and I agree trying to get that in 2.5" form factor is hard.
Or move to SuperMicro.
Are HPs off the list now?
-
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@tim_g said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Looks like you're stuck trying to find a 520 then... or you'll have to spend the extra beans on a 720 if you can't find one.
That's a lot of storage, and I agree trying to get that in 2.5" form factor is hard.
Or move to SuperMicro.
Are HPs off the list now?
Just not cost effective for storage. Haven't been for generations. Dell R720, R720xd, SuperMicro and Huawei are about the only affordable chassis for storage systems.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said:
@dashrender LOL, that's an upgrade for us! We're still running Server 2008 R2 on almost every server in our fleet!
Might be an upgrade, but why deploy anything new that isn't current? Why take the time and effort to deploy old software?
Because we still have keys for 2008 R2. It's one more thing that the bean counters can avoid spending money on (and that's not MY choice by the way...).
-
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said:
@dashrender LOL, that's an upgrade for us! We're still running Server 2008 R2 on almost every server in our fleet!
Might be an upgrade, but why deploy anything new that isn't current? Why take the time and effort to deploy old software?
Because we still have keys for 2008 R2. It's one more thing that the bean counters can avoid spending money on (and that's not MY choice by the way...).
Start reminding those bean guys that 2008 R2 gets no more support/updates as of 2020
https://i.imgur.com/Mh8jlYV.png -
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said:
@dashrender LOL, that's an upgrade for us! We're still running Server 2008 R2 on almost every server in our fleet!
Might be an upgrade, but why deploy anything new that isn't current? Why take the time and effort to deploy old software?
Because we still have keys for 2008 R2. It's one more thing that the bean counters can avoid spending money on (and that's not MY choice by the way...).
How does Windows even get into an environment like that? The logic that keeps you on old Windows should be the same logic that immediately takes Windows out of the equation.
-
@dashrender said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
@shuey said:
@dashrender LOL, that's an upgrade for us! We're still running Server 2008 R2 on almost every server in our fleet!
Might be an upgrade, but why deploy anything new that isn't current? Why take the time and effort to deploy old software?
Because we still have keys for 2008 R2. It's one more thing that the bean counters can avoid spending money on (and that's not MY choice by the way...).
Start reminding those bean guys that 2008 R2 gets no more support/updates as of 2020
https://i.imgur.com/Mh8jlYV.pngBean counters don't care about functionality or support. That's why bean counters should never be in the business decision line. They are looking at cost and are trained to look at cost. They don't know what it is for or what matters.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Advice on building "storage servers" with two DL380 G7 servers:
Bean counters don't care about functionality or support. That's why bean counters should never be in the business decision line. They are looking at cost and are trained to look at cost. They don't know what it is for or what matters.
So how are these people actually good for business then?
