kaagapay :
An Access database of 100MB is our largest file with frequent access.
Our largest files are 500MB photoshop for printing tarpolines.
We are a publisher so our other files are docs, xls, indesign, etc.
kaagapay :
We already have Win.Server 2003 license.
My budget is about $1,300.
I found a Xitrix server that is about $1300. I'll check on Monday about the details. So I am wondering if I can put something together for less?
I see that Intel boards with P45 have RAID 5. Is RAID from the Motherboard unusually slow compared to a separate RAID card? Any way to say how much slower?
The Xitrix will include:
No Hot-swap housing
Quad Xeon 3220
2gb ddr2 memory
4 SATA HD bay
3 HD of 1tb each
integrated video (ATI ES1000)
3 year warranty on parts & labor
no OS
Find out what chipset that server uses. It sounds like Intel 3000 MCH, which is very old stuff and supports PCI-X expansion slots only and not PCIe we use nowadays for things like hardware RAID and NIC controllers. If that's the case then that $1300 would be better spent on a DIY build. Whether it has a "3 year warranty on parts & labor" or not, if any unlikely hardware fault does arise you will still need a technician to figure out where the fault is first anyway.
From what I've highlighted above, in terms of storage the database needs go onto a small array that's NOT RAID5 (
reason). Something like 2x74GB WD Raptor in RAID1 will do; enterprise-class storage without using SAS which raises cost significantly. The same array can be used for the operating system.
For your other data the performance from host/driver RAID5 (e.g. Intel Matrix RAID) is fine. Either 3x500GB or 3x1TB depending on your storage need.
Be sure to get drives that support
TLER like the WD RE series or Seagate ES series.
As I've said earlier in this thread a hardware RAID controller is really only needed for RAID5 or 6 array which needs high throughput especially if lots of writing to the array from client machines are involved. But normally under such conditions the GbE ports gets saturated first, unless you use link aggregation.
Again, a hardware RAID controller raises cost to the build significantly.
Finally all data still needs regular backups. RAID with redundancy only protect from drive failures and not from events like accidental deletion or virus.