Solved

Best advice for Fileserver

Posted on 2014-02-18
7
187 Views
Last Modified: 2016-11-23
We have a client with a 7 year old server, domain controller and fileserver, o/s server 2003
external to that they have an exchange server.
On this DC / Fileserver , they have 1.5TB data .
Today we had a failed hard drive (raid 6)...
so the customer is asking what solution we should go for (either HP or Dell) and should we be looking at a storage array to keep the fileserver off the domain? and what solution could they have to enable a secondary domain.
The typical DC server we would go for would be a DL380 Gen 8 with Server 2008.
Just wondering amongst the experts out there how they prefer the fileserver on a standalone server or storage array device?
cheers


File server for the sharedrive

4 x 1TB SAS in raid 6 with 2x72GB sas for OS 16GB ram server 2008R2
2 psu

New DC – Server 2008R2
2 136GB SAS mirrored
2 psu
16/32 GB ram.

Failover DC with similar performance.
0
Comment
Question by:unrealone1
  • 3
  • 3
7 Comments
 
LVL 6

Assisted Solution

by:alexgreen312
alexgreen312 earned 250 total points
Comment Utility
It really depends on your budget, I could recommend the HP PAR3 array which is just beyond epic however costs around £35000 which is probably out of budget.

However the P2000 array is an excellent choice and if I remember rightly HP do a starter kit which includes

2 switches
4 HBA's
The array

You do need to add your own disks but it can take up to 12TB of storage if I remember rightly, this costs around £7000 for the array or £9000 for the kit.

If neither of these are suitable then please say and we can discuss further. These will need a server to allow access to the data.

Regards

Alex
0
 
LVL 16

Accepted Solution

by:
Gerald Connolly earned 250 total points
Comment Utility
It seems pointless to go with an expensive RAID system when your client only has 1.5TB.

Is there a problem with just replacing the failed disk, or are they looking at the age of the server and worrying about reliability?

A small server with (smaller than a 380) with the appropriate disks using RAID10 (software RAID) , or a NAS box would do the job
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:alexgreen312
Comment Utility
I wouldn't bother with RAID10 for a data storage system...

1. You loose half the storage space
2. RAID5 with a hot spare would be more efficient.
0
What Is Threat Intelligence?

Threat intelligence is often discussed, but rarely understood. Starting with a precise definition, along with clear business goals, is essential.

 
LVL 16

Expert Comment

by:Gerald Connolly
Comment Utility
Alex, they use RAID-6 now on 4 disks that 50%.

RAID-5 might be more efficient in space, but it's lousy at write speed and with the size of modern disks and the rebuild times involved your data is at risk.

RAID10 is much faster at Write than RAID-5 and if you don't use the fake-RAID controllers in modern low-end servers and do it in software it's much faster for Read as well
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:alexgreen312
Comment Utility
I'm sorry but RAID5 isn't "that" much worse on write speeds, rebuild times yes can be an issue however a RAID10 array is overkill for his needs.

Besides this is a file server, it's not a Database server. If it were a database, exchange or other high I/O server I would 100% agree with you that RAID10 would be the way to go. However this is a file server with 1.5TB, RAID10 would be pointless and a waste of disk space for his needs. Besides once you get the hot spare in there it wouldn't be an issue since that drive would start rebuilding straight away. If he's got terrible backups then yeah I'd be a bit more concerned....

Also, you loose the same drive in the mirror you're screwed as well. Nothing is infallible.
0
 
LVL 16

Expert Comment

by:Gerald Connolly
Comment Utility
Alex, according to the OP they are currently using RAID-6 across 4 spindles, so a 4 spindle RAID10 isnt overkill and it will have faster write and read speed than RAID-5 or RAID-6.

In RAID-5 the rebuild times of modern huge disks means that data is now exposed to the risk of a second disk failure during the rebuild for an unacceptable long time and is therefore not recommended for business use anymore.
0
 
LVL 1

Author Closing Comment

by:unrealone1
Comment Utility
Sorry, project has been abandoned. Thanks for your time.
0

Featured Post

How to run any project with ease

Manage projects of all sizes how you want. Great for personal to-do lists, project milestones, team priorities and launch plans.
- Combine task lists, docs, spreadsheets, and chat in one
- View and edit from mobile/offline
- Cut down on emails

Join & Write a Comment

Requirements: root access via SSH, telnet, or other.. Alternately, access from the server administrator to run a counter-strike server, and the proper access rights to do so. Enough free disk space (and allowed to use this much, eg disk quota): 6…
The 6120xp switches seem to have a bug when you create a fiber port channel when you have a UCS fabric interconnects talking to them.  If you follow the Cisco guide for the UCS, the FC Port channel will never come up and it will say that there are n…
Here's a very brief overview of the methods PRTG Network Monitor (https://www.paessler.com/prtg) offers for monitoring bandwidth, to help you decide which methods you´d like to investigate in more detail.  The methods are covered in more detail in o…
This demo shows you how to set up the containerized NetScaler CPX with NetScaler Management and Analytics System in a non-routable Mesos/Marathon environment for use with Micro-Services applications.

743 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

17 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now