Server 'type' 1u vs 2u
-
It's just a chassis size difference. The only difference to know is how many drives do you need to fit into it. If you can fit all that you need in a 1U, that is half of the size. If you need more space, you get a 2U. That's all that there is to it.
I've used servers of every size from 1U to 9U plus ones that didn't fit in racks.
-
The number of Us that you want is as few as needed to get the job done. Otherwise you just look at the specs and buy the right server. I think that I must be missing something in the question.
-
I'm not completely sure what the question is.. I have the following - looking to replace much of it - maybe
PowerEdge T610
Service Tag: GCFFSL1 | Express Service Code: 35580042613
1 physical 146GB drive
HR Server: Running Abra Suite (uses MSSQL DB)
Also a file serverPowerEdge T610
Service Tag: C7QTXR1 | Express Service Code: 26589718045
7 physical: 3 73GB 4 500GB
Fiscal Server: Abilia
Also a file serverPowerEdge T620
Service Tag: 85RTGX1 | Express Service Code: 17763314149
6 physical: 6 500GB
Transportation: Vehicle dispatch / Fleet management
also a file server (limited)PowerEdge T310
Service Tag: 2XSBFN1 | Express Service Code: 6396511213
Running SpiceworksThe other three 'servers' are desktop boxes running either an external USB drive for a share or internal drive shares.
xByte may buy back hardware I have. I have a PE server still in a box - can't get to it since it's currently buried under other boxes, and a IBM class server. Goal is to par down but still have what I need.
Most of these are 4u units. The only one I don't think I can get rid of is the t620 since it was paid for with grant money - to much paper work.
-
The real question isn't what you have right now. It is what load is being used by those servers. Are all the drives full? Then you may want to look at a R730xd (I think that is how they denote it) which provides a silly amount of drive space / SSDs in a 2U box.
-
@g.jacobse whatcha gonna do with that old hardware :)?
-
@coliver said:
The real question isn't what you have right now. It is what load is being used by those servers. Are all the drives full? Then you may want to look at a R730xd (I think that is how they denote it) which provides a silly amount of drive space / SSDs in a 2U box.
The t620 is set up retardedly. 6 500GB drives; 3 logical drives at 500GB each. Two logical drives are 465GB Free. Not really a capacity issue.
I don't remember I worked with ZONES several months ago and ran a DPAC report.. I should find it. but the level wasn't enough to warrant this level of gear.
@Hubtech said:
@g.jacobse whatcha gonna do with that old hardware :)?
'Sell' it back to xbyte to offset the cost of the new box. Otherwise, I'll just keep it and make it right
-
@g.jacobse Well if that is the case it wouldn't hurt to reconfigure that array, one big RAID 10 would be a really good use of those drives.
What are you running into right now? Just too much gear for what you are doing? Are you virtualized?
-
@coliver said:
@g.jacobse Well if that is the case it wouldn't hurt to reconfigure that array, one big RAID 10 would be a really good use of those drives.
What are you running into right now? Just too much gear for what you are doing? Are you virtualized?
Not really running into any thing as of yet. Other that the biggest item.. IT'S NOT A DOMAIN! No Active Directory...(yes,..Insert Facepalm here).
No VMs running,.. though I have considered it.
-
@g.jacobse said:
@coliver said:
@g.jacobse Well if that is the case it wouldn't hurt to reconfigure that array, one big RAID 10 would be a really good use of those drives.
What are you running into right now? Just too much gear for what you are doing? Are you virtualized?
Not really running into any thing as of yet. Other that the biggest item.. IT'S NOT A DOMAIN! No Active Directory...(yes,..Insert Facepalm here).
No VMs running,.. though I have considered it.
Out of curiosity what are the current roles of these "servers"
-
@coliver
Updated device list above. -
Looks like one modern server could replace this whole lot, VMs baby!
-
@Dashrender said:
Looks like one modern server could replace this whole lot, VMs baby!
Not only that but I am beginning to think that the T620 you currently have could make for an excellent virtual host. Maybe sell your other servers and max out the RAM in that bad boy... Providing you aren't struggling with disk space or IOPS that would probably work fairly well..
-
It is pretty rare that an SMB cannot squeeze into a single physical host when set up correctly. Modern processors are so massively powerful and you can put so much memory and disk IO into a single chassis that it is really astounding what you can do in one chassis.
-
@coliver said:
@Dashrender said:
Looks like one modern server could replace this whole lot, VMs baby!
Not only that but I am beginning to think that the T620 you currently have could make for an excellent virtual host. Maybe sell your other servers and max out the RAM in that bad boy... Providing you aren't struggling with disk space or IOPS that would probably work fairly well..
I have the report showing my IOPS around here in email. I'm happy to post it, most of what we have is files,.. which may be getting smaller since the drive failure (still in the clean room for eval).
ALL of the servers / boxes need to be scrubbed and rebuilt IMO - total fubar in my opinion.. which since I'm not MCSE CCNA or any of the other alphabets,.. doesn't mean much to some.
I'm leaning towards 2 Physical (1 for AD) and going VM. However the software we use isn't supported in a VM environment...
-
why two servers? AD lives just fine on VMs. how big is your business?
-
@Hubtech said:
why two servers? AD lives just fine on VMs. how big is your business?
Large enough - We technically have two 'business' units. Over all we have about 300 employees. As for AD playing well with others, if Small Business Server could handle the 300 users AND was still production, I'd go that route. SBS worked very well for me in the past, and I had very little issues with it.
-
all i'm saying is...you could get 1 hot dog server and virtualize. but you do you boo boo!
-
@g.jacobse said:
SBS worked very well for me in the past, and I had very little issues with it.
Why would you use SBS? You don't have inhouse Exchange/email - you mentioned it's Gmail now. There would be little or no gain there. That said, SBS capped out at 75 users so it's off the table.
AD should be in a VM all by itself.
@g.jacobse said:
However the software we use isn't supported in a VM environment...
What do you have that doesn't support virtualization?
-
@Dashrender said:
@g.jacobse said:
However the software we use isn't supported in a VM environment...
What do you have that doesn't support virtualization?
There are a few vendors that I have encountered that don't support their software in a VM. Thankfully they are all remote support and to the software it doesn't really care. I think it is more along the lines of, "This isn't a tested configuration."
@Hubtech said:
Large enough - We technically have two 'business' units. Over all we have about 300 employees. As for AD playing well with others, if Small Business Server could handle the 300 users AND was still production, I'd go that route. SBS worked very well for me in the past, and I had very little issues with it.
Don't go with SBS, it really isn't necessary and if I remember correctly is being phased out.
-
In my previous employment we had no more than 60 staff across four locations within a mile of each other. SBS was perfect for what they needed.
In this role there are about 300 - so SBS is off the table. Not to mention that SBS has been retired by MS. SBS was a good albeit compromised product - it served my (then) small organizations needs.
Here, SBS is just simply not an option - well past the limitations based upon users alone. We aren't using Exchange since it WAS POP3/IMAP. Still a bit left to transition out of, but we are moving to Office 365 - nice thing about being a NPO - 90% of my users in O365 are free.
We run Sage MIP, AbiliaSuite and Routematch (transportation software), As @coliver stated, they don't support the software in a VM environment.
