Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?

Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops

FTP Required also

Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.

Thank you.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com:

> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage
> and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S
> should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>

Just say "no". Trust me.

Lordy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com:

> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage
> and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S
> should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.

A bit more detail ...

The company need to pay for a IT professional and hardware. They also
need to pay for support.

From your post you do not have the skills or long term resources to
undertake this task.
Thats not a criticism of you. I dont have the skills to do many things
. I probably could build a reliable PC, but not confident up to
business file standards (depending on how bullet proof they wanted it).

They also have to be prepared to pay the going rate for what they want.

If you build this server and it goes tits up, and they lose all thier
backups and orders , and lose money, its not going to bode well for you
or them.

Point them at Dell, or Compaq websites / sales advisors. Then leave well
alone

Lordy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Lordy <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in news:Xns95B97478C3322lordybigfootcom@
130.133.1.4:

> "Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in
> news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com:
>
>> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage
>> and backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S
>> should I be looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>>
>
> Point them at Dell, or Compaq websites / sales advisors. Then leave well
> alone
>

Last word. An OEM solution from Dell, Compaq, HP etc will likely be cheaper
than anything you or I could build of comparable quality.

Lordy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Remedy wrote:

> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
> backups.
> What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
> looking to provide the above?

A server is simply a machine which concentrates resources and makes them
accessible to a number of clients.

Most 'server' systems are grossly overspecced for the job at hand,
although if you plan to run server-based software, such as MS SQL
Server, you'll need a grossly overspecced machine.

Also, define 'Backups'. How much data, and do you mean backup as in
'it's on the server and the client', or backup as in 'it's written
nightly to removable media that is stored elsewhere'.

Here I back up about 8Gb each night, which is _WAY_ too much (but you
try and persuade users to tidy up their directories). I used to do this
to OnStream ADR tapes (30Gb capacity), but the drive failed and they
don't make them any more, so I'm now writing to DVD-RAM.

An alternative to nightly removable media backups is to keep the files
on a RAID. You can build cheap SATA raids with many budget
motherboards. However you should still do periodic backups to removable
media, because while a RAID will survive a disc failure, it won't
survive a fire or other disaster.

> Is XP Pro sufficient?

This will provide you with the ability to create shares that up to ten
users can access. No more than ten sessions are possible. With the
server products (Windows 2003 Server, etc.) you have to buy client
access licenses (CALs) for the number of users. Each session is a
single client connecting to the server (to any number of shares)

> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops

If you don't expect that to grow, then XP Pro would suffice, although
personally I'd go with 2000 if I HAD to use windows...

> FTP Required also

Does this mean it will be internet-facing as well. Welcome to the world
of trying desperately to keep up with the number of exploits out there.

> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.

Then you really ought to explore it. In the non-windows world, the
likes of Samba throw the idea of session limits and client access
licenses out of the window. You can get the same oomph out of older
hardware, and lower cost, or in my case NO cost (recycled hardware, and
free/homebrew software).

As a guide, I have one 'server' here, which is a 300MHz AMD K6/2, with
128Mb of memory, a pile of large discs, and a network card, serving
30-40 users with a couple of dozen file shares via SMB or NFS, has an
FTP server, runs the internal DNS and DHCP. It's been up for 364 days
(which probably means I'm overdue for a long power cut that will
flatline the UPS today), and the load average on it barely registers
(current is 0.00, but I've seen it get to 0.23)
The backup runs automatically each night. No special software is
involved (I wrote the backup script myself, all of 144 lines(bash
script) and 198 lines(in C) including comments). It gathers,
compresses, and sorts backup filesets to make the best use of the media
involved. It's cheap, effective, fast enough, and I reckon I could
squeeze a MySQL server in there too.

---

So, to really offer proper advice, you need to think about volumes of
data, whether any local processing is involved, security of data,
whether you want to offer any other network services, like DNS, DHCP,
IMAP/POP3 Mail, etc.
And do not allow anyone to install MS Office on the server, or anything
else for that matter. The MS Marketing machine likes things like Word
to start 'instantly', so even if you are not using an office
application, all of the DLL's get loaded at startup anyway. Besides, if
you put user applications on the server, it soon becomes someone's
desktop instead.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

the only difference between a server and a PC is the OS all the rest of the
hardware can be in both a pc and a server XP pro is not a server OS as such
"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in message
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
>backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
>looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in message
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
> backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
> looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.
>
>

A server "serves" files and data to client computers (the 4 laptops + 2
desktops).

That doesn't seem like a big set up, but could it expand quickly? You could
build a very cheap low-spec server (1 GB processor / 60GB drive) and
wireless solution that would accomodate that client base. However, it would
not be ideal (apart from no wires), and would make future exansion
difficult. It would also be slow compared to big networks but then it might
perform the same due to the low amount of users.

Personally though I would point them in the direction of a professional
solution. Dell will provide the server / OS / support apps (backup) / and
support for a competative price (ie negotiable).

Last thing you want is an irate management threatening to take you to court
because the server you built died and took the whole lot with it.

Also don't forget the phone support you'd be obliged to give.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Kevin R" <dontemailme@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:WTBtd.1805$zR.1318@newsfe4-win.ntli.net:

> the only difference between a server and a PC is the OS all the rest
> of the hardware can be in both a pc and a server XP pro is not a
> server OS as such

A file server can be exactly the same as a home PC of course, but will
often have an emphasis on higher spec hard drives, better / redundant
cooling, hardware monitoring etc. Builtin backup for convenience. CPU power
is not so important.

Lordy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Kav" <not@rrr.net> wrote in
news:5qCtd.32803$up1.24722@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Personally though I would point them in the direction of a
> professional solution. Dell will provide the server / OS / support
> apps (backup) / and support for a competative price (ie negotiable).
>
> Last thing you want is an irate management threatening to take you to
> court because the server you built died and took the whole lot with
> it.
>

Thank you. I thought I was going mad

Lordy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

To add to my previous post, and to echo Lordy's comments..

Building and configuring a server yourself without the necessary
knowledge to do so is not something you want to do.

Building and configuring a server yourself WITH the necessary knowledge
to do so is also not something you want to do unless it is your job to
do so. Servers are machines that organisations depend upon. If they
are expecting you to provide support for it, don't go there unless you
are willing to deal with the one inevitable component of any server.
That component is called a USER

USERS come in many varieties.
Some users are technically minded. These users are dangerous, because
they will mess with the server and you'll have a great time finding out
why something you set up isn't working quite the same way any more.

Most users are highly-skilled, fully-trained, professional idiots.
These users are dangerous, as they will mess with your sanity.

Either way, unless they are paying you to look after it, then you don't
want to do it.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Remedy wrote:

> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
> backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
> looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops

As has been said, a server is usually functionally the same as any other
machine. In a larger organisation you want a machine designed for
reliability and performance: reliable motherboard possible with several
processors, ECC RAM, SCSI RAID hard discs, maybe dual power supplies,
Uninterruptible Power Supply. It would normally run a network operating
system (NOS) such as Novell Netware, Linux, Microsoft Windows Server
version, and would not also be used as someone's workstation. You need a
different level of expertise to maintain a NOS-based system.

Purpose-designed servers can be bought from the companies other posters
have suggested, and from Fujitsu-Siemens and others. They cost a lot
more than ordinary machines.

With a small number of users and no requirement for access control and
security it is possible to set up a peer-to-peer (P2P) network using,
say Microsoft Windows non-server versions. If there is a lot of network
traffic this becomes an increasingly bad idea as network size increases.
If it is just a matter of people doing single-user word processing and
similar, rather than, say, a heavy-duty multiuser database, you could
probably use a P2P network which is essentially a collection of
independent machines with all data files being stored on one machine
(either a user's workstation or a dedicated machine) and backed up
nightly onto a tape. Depending upon the value of the data, you should
have a scheme which keeps a weeks' worth of tapes, with one off-site.

The performance requirements of a file server need not be great. I have
very successfully run about 20 users off a Pentium 75 running Netware
3.12 (old version of this NOS); a 386 would probably have been OK (it's
disc, not CPU, performance which matters). This is less true for a
machine which acts as more than file server (e.g., SQL database server)
and has a graphical user interface. One company recently migrated from
such a system to a state-of-the=art server and NOS, and were very
disappointed to find performance dropped slightly.

HTHm
--
Michael Salem

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in message
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
> backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
> looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
Please! Listen to all the advice you've been given in the other replies!
The fact that you even ask about Win XP (Windows Server 2003 would be a
possibility), tells me you aren't ready to build or maintain a server.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Peter van der Goes" <p_vandergoes@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:ljDtd.126344$%x.91497@okepread04...
>
> "Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in message
> news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>> I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
>> backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
>> looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>>
>> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>>
>> FTP Required also
>>
>> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
> Please! Listen to all the advice you've been given in the other replies!
> The fact that you even ask about Win XP (Windows Server 2003 would be a
> possibility), tells me you aren't ready to build or maintain a server.
>
Yup, top quality advice, the only rider I'd add is that if you are sure the client is gonna pay you
big, big, big (did I say big) bucks for the installation and support then think about it, otherwise
it's a job for Michael Dell.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

I would just go to Ebay and find a NEW IN BOX server. A dell for instance
will have full factory warranty. I would not cut corners and use XP pro. A
full version of windows 2003 server with an additional 5 CAL's is the way to
go. If you use worksation to serve files you will be limited to a max of 10
users.

I would install a decent raid, minimum of 1 GB for RAM, and a reliable tape
backup or DVD backup. To build a server from scratch will not save you too
much money. A factory server will save you the headaches of finding windows
compatible equipment, installing the equipment, testing the equipment. Not
to mention what to do if you have a hardware problem down the road.


"Remedy" <r@r.et> wrote in message
news:41b6df9f$0$16575$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>I have been approached to build a server, to be used for file storage and
>backups. What is a server by definition and what specs and O/S should I be
>looking to provide the above? Is XP Pro sufficient?
>
> Current IT infrastructure comprises of 4 laptops + 2 desktops
>
> FTP Required also
>
> Please do not advise linux has I am not converse with it.
>
> Thank you.
>