Dell PowerEdge 2400 - Overclock.net

apt2vanish · 09-16-09

Is this a good server for todays standards?
I am thinking about using this to create a failover cluster to our network, not sure if it can support server 2008 R2 though.......
I can't seem to find what socket this is. I know its dual, but I'd like to see If I could upgrade the 733MHz Pentium III chips to something better

VincentJ · 09-16-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by apt2vanish

Is this a good server for todays standards?
I am thinking about using this to create a failover cluster to our network, not sure if it can support server 2008 R2 though.......
I can't seem to find what socket this is. I know its dual, but I'd like to see If I could upgrade the 733MHz Pentium III chips to something better

I do believe it is Slot 1. Not gonna get anything better than what you got. It's upgradable to 2GB of ram. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slot_1

Manyak · 09-16-09

If you're looking for passive failover for a few specific things when you take your main server down (like only AD and DNS for example) then it's fine (active failover will actually make your network worse with that thing). But it won't handle apps running over terminal services too well.

Also, you may want to consider using a SAN in this case (well, a really simple one with just one server for storage). This way both this and the main server can share the storage used for everything and you won't have to buy a whole other set of HDD's to match, and you don't saturate the network keeping everything in sync.

Of course, I assume you're talking about the same network as in the other thread

apt2vanish · 09-16-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manyak

If you're looking for passive failover for a few specific things when you take your main server down (like only AD and DNS for example) then it's fine (active failover will actually make your network worse with that thing). But it won't handle apps running over terminal services too well.

Also, you may want to consider using a SAN in this case (well, a really simple one with just one server for storage). This way both this and the main server can share the storage used for everything and you won't have to buy a whole other set of HDD's to match, and you don't saturate the network keeping everything in sync.

Of course, I assume you're talking about the same network as in the other thread

That sound like a start, and yes its the same network

So it would be good for AD, and DNS when I need to do server maintenance. But what about TS, could I use it for a failover TS only?

We have a main server which has TS, then our 2nd server which has AD on a raid 10 (four 500GB drives) which I also use for backups every other week, and data storage. It also has TS on it, just in case the main one goes down people can log onto it (not a service failover though) I heard thats not a good idea to have AD, and TS on the same server, security issues.

It would be good to take access away from the data server (TS) then create a failover TS for the main server with the edge.......
How does that sound?

Manyak · 09-16-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by apt2vanish

That sound like a start, and yes its the same network

So it would be good for AD, and DNS when I need to do server maintenance. But what about TS, could I use it for a failover TS only?

We have a main server which has TS, then our 2nd server which has AD on a raid 10 (four 500GB drives) which I also use for backups every other week, and data storage. It also has TS on it, just in case the main one goes down people can log onto it (not a service failover though) I heard thats not a good idea to have AD, and TS on the same server, security issues.

It would be good to take access away from the data server (TS) then create a failover TS for the main server with the edge.......
How does that sound?

Yeah, AD and TS shouldn't be done together unless you're using VMs. But there's no way this thing can handle that.

What's the hardware in server #2 (CPU, RAM, slots available on motherboard)?

apt2vanish · 09-17-09

CPU- Athlonx2 6400BE 3.2GHz (possibly upgrade to a Phenomx4 940BE 3Ghz)
Ram- 8GB Patriot 6400 677Mhz 4x2GB non ecc
Free slots-3PCI, and 2 PICe x16, one PCIe x8

apt2vanish · 09-17-09

CPU- Athlonx2 6400BE 3.2GHz (possibly upgrade to a Phenomx4 940BE 3Ghz)
Ram- 8GB Patriot 6400 677Mhz 4x2GB non ecc
Free slots-3PCI, and 2 PICe x16, one PCIe x8

Manyak · 09-17-09

Hrm, working with only this hardware is a tricky one.

I think the best thing would be to start using the Pentium III for backups instead (get it a TOE gigabit card), then use VM's to set the Athlon as the failover server for everything.

Also, don't forget you'll need to set up two additional networks between the servers when you cluster them - one for the heartbeat and one for data (you don't even need to use a switch since it's only two PCs, just connect a cable between their NICs). So either way you're gonna end up buying NICs if you don't have them already.

apt2vanish · 09-17-09

I've got 3 or 4 D-link Gigabit pci cards, from a previous exchange cluster.
It has a tape backup thingy, I got about 10 160GB tapes, should be a good way to backup our AD.

		Overclock.net - Overclocking.net > Specialty Builds > Servers
Dell PowerEdge 2400

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)