0

I appologise if this is the wrong site to post on, but it seemed the most relevant in the Stack Exchange.

I run a small time file host and we're quickly expanding. Because of this, I'm looking to buy two new dedicated storage servers, and I could use your help to find a dedicated server that suites the bill.

For a start it needs a 1Gbit unmetered connection. This is a must so I can still provide a good download service. The next thing it needs is 3TB+ of storage space. I don't mind if it isn't in RAID, but it would be nice so I can always keep a backup of everything. I'm a little bit clueless on the CPU and RAM though. I was aiming for the cheapest CPU the provider supplies, something like a P4 single core and 2GB of RAM. Do you think this is enough to satisfy multiple users running downloads at the same time?

I contacted FDCServers for a quote and this is what they quoted me:

  • Dual core Intel ATOM CPU
  • 2GB RAM
  • 2 x 2TB HDD
  • 1Gbit unmetered

The best we can do is $375/mo.

Do you think this is a good spec for the price? I could always go to something like 500Mbps peak time to 1Gbit off peak in terms of bandwidth to make it cheaper I guess.

Suggestions are welcome, as well as companies that you know offer a good deal for this kind of stuff. By Budget is around $350/m.

Thanks. :)

  • ATOM? Really? I'm very wary of suggesting anything with an ATOM processor. You may also need to look very closely at your filesystem and operating system when designing to scale out. – Mark Henderson Aug 27 '10 at 00:28
  • Have you spec'ed out and costed Amazon EC2 and S3? I am pretty sure that $350/month will buy way more than this. – tomjedrz Aug 27 '10 at 04:07
  • You will need to see if the drive+ram can handle the workload. Big files or small files, is there a "hot" subset of the 3TB and how large is it? Will you need to run intensive processes on it? An atom will really not handle much. If you're running a workload with peaks you could be better off with a volume-based service – Joris Aug 27 '10 at 05:56
  • Also, 1Gbit for $375 is truely bargain bin pricing; I'm pretty sure they'll need to oversubscribe you and/or take a loss on transit. I wouldn't expect much help at those rates if the throughput is less than desired. – Joris Aug 27 '10 at 06:04

2 Answers2

1

1) RAID is not a backup.

2) Do the servers need to be colocated? What is the media you will be hosting?

3) Would a colocated Drobo (with maybe a Mac Mini or other 'nettop' as the head) fit the bill?

  • 1) A RAID 1 setup will mirror the contents of one disk to another, I thought this would be a good way to make sure there's always a backup of everyone's files if one of the HDD's breaks. 2) I can't actually provide my own servers, I can only lease them from a provider. All types of media will be hosted, as it's up to the user what they upload. 3) Drobo's look too expensive to be honest, with the S series starting at £200ish on Amazon and that's without any hard drives or a "nettop", or even bandwidth that I'd have to lease from the datacenter. –  Aug 27 '10 at 00:41
  • if a drive fails, but what about processor, motherboard, memory, raid controller, nic, internet? Raid is not a backup. It prevents a headache, but bottom line is its not something that should be used as a "backup" – grufftech Aug 27 '10 at 02:54
0

I know what RAID does. You're right - a RAID1 setup will mirror the contents of one disk to another. In real time. It also replicates when someone deletes a file. Which means the file disappears from both (or 'n') disks.

RAID is great for high availability, but it does nothing to prevent loss of data from accidental deletion, malware, or corruption. RAID is simply not a backup.

As far as your requirements - 1Gbit unmetered handoff, 3TB of storage at $350/mo - I'm not sure are reasonable. I found a place that does 350GB of transfer at 100Mbit handoff for $299/mo, but it's still BYOS.

Best of luck.

Jeremy
  • 56
  • 1