linux 7.3 on poweredge 4600

Alexander Lazarevich alazarev at
Tue Aug 20 21:26:00 CDT 2002

sounds all good.

the tape backup system is over the network, and yes, it is slow. but
otherwise its a great system. totaly works, SOOO easy to maintain. almost
0 admining. id hate to move to something else that would chunk up more of
my time. but eventually we'll have to, cause sooner or later 1.5TB is
going to be pocket change...

but going with RAID 5 will solve a lot of our current problems. right now,
our fileserver has NO RAID, and i must restore from tape backup when a
drive fails. this is terribly slow, and ill enjoy the speed of RAID 5
restores over tape restores.

one more question: what kind of drives does dell put in it's servers? im
assuming they are 80-pin 1" SCSI's? or do they use 68-pin?


---                                                        ---
   Alex Lazarevich | Systems | Imaging Technology Group
   alazarev at | (217)244-1565 |
---                                                        ---

On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, jason andrade wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Alexander Lazarevich wrote:
> > Sigh, I always fail to give enough info on these lists....
> grin.
> > Fileserver maily. Also might want to run sendmail on it, but I'm pushing
> > to move that to a different system. We need 1/2 TB, with expansion
> wise choice.  but please don't think about nfs mounting the spool out to
> the mail box..
> > capability to 1TB. Supports 500+ users. However, concurrent R/W is very
> > low, no more than 30 at the busiest times (rare), average at 5-10. Most
> > data is large binary image files.
> sounds like a pretty good system match then.
> > > o if this is an important system, upgrade the next day onsite warranty to
> > >   4 hour same business day
> >
> > Hmm, your probably right. I'd hate to wait a whole day cause the
> > motherboard failed. I'm just trying to keep it under 20K...
> well, it can be a whole lot worse than that, but i won't go into details.. i'm
> currently *ahem* resolving something with dell at the moment.. (who to their
> credit are doing their best..)
> but 4hr onsite for something that is a single point of failure (your company
> stops when this fileserver does) is a worthwhile investment in reducing
> your risk profile.  onsite support also takes the 4hr contracts very seriously
> (not that the next day isn't, but lets just say you get significant extra
> value for money/priority in going for the 4 hr onsite 24x7 if you can)
> > We must have fileserver space of at least 1/2TB in RAID 5, AND the server
> > drives must be RAID1. Since the servers only carry 8 drives, we must go
> > with a storage system as well. And that's fine because we want to
> > expand in the future, and I'm assuming I can just buy exact same
> > drives and put them into the system myself?
> well, you might not get the exact same drives, but you are likely to be fine
> with getting 1" 73G drives for a while yet.
> > Or maybe we should go with the rack mount server (2650), which by the
> > logic you suggest would be more cost-effective because we would fully
> > populate it. I got a quote for that two.
> nod, you're reading my mind.  the 4600 is a really nice box, but you are
> perhaps paying a premium for some expansion there that you might not need
> so it's worth carefully comparing the two, since the cpus are similar.
> i look at the 4600 when i specifically need lots of internal storage or
> pci expansion.  the 2650 is more suited if i know for sure neither of
> those are an issue.
> > Already on this dude. I plan on getting 5 drives in the system. 2 in RAID
> > 1, 1 drive for swap, and 2 for replacements. I just didn't mention this
> > before.
> i would really get you to consider not putting swap on a second drive, but
> keeping it mirrored.  think about it - you've gone to all the trouble of
> having raid1 so you have no downtime if a system disk fails, but if it's the
> swap disk, your system crashes..  this stuff comes up on sun boxes all the
> time and every admin's advice to me has been to mirror the swap.
> but yes, you seem to have considered this part pretty well if you have that
> level of spares in place.
> > Hmm, we don't need "spectacular" performance. I want to get the redundant
> > power supply, as well as battery.
> based on what you said above, the perc3/dc is fine and will do the job well.
> > We have ADSM / Magstar tape backup in place that will do that job.
> are you going to backup over the network ?
> > If you have any more comments, I'd love to hear them. It's good to see
> > this list gets some activity.
> not really. 4G IMHO is way overkill for this, so if you had to trade on anything
> i'd drop the memory to 2G and use the money elsewhere.
> otherwise, it looks like a pretty well sized system for the role.
> regards,
> -jason

More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list