Server Life exepectancy

Server Life exepectancy

Didn't find your answer?

We bought a Compaq Proliant ML350 in June 2003. It's now getting short of memory and needs a couple of other upgrades. Is there likely to be enough life in the server to justify spending £1,500 on the upgrades, or should I spend £7,700 on a new server?
Kenneth Osborne

Replies (28)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By NeilW
12th Dec 2005 12:38

Over-engineered
Detailing the pieces of paper you have doesn't stop your solution being over-engineered.

With modern PCs, you don't even need a central server or domain management at all. You can do it all using peer level technology and replication. That way you don't even need hardware maintenance. Anything that breaks you can just bin and get a new one.

NeilW

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
12th Dec 2005 13:30

Fair comment
Yes that is a fair comment.

What you don't get with a peer model is enforceable password policy, centralised access controls & name and address books - the list is endless. Backups can also be more complicated.

The point is that many small businesses do depend on maybe one or two servers which are often not well specified and are rarely monitored properly if at all. They also tend to be "carpet mounted" and sometimes in hot cupboards.

Justin is correct that network cards don't fail that often, but switches they are connected to do and this is where the extra redundancy pays dividends.

The cost of downtime over a servers life if it is critical adds signficantly to its TCO, and much of it can be avoided with careful configuration, a few extra pounds in hardware and proper monitoring.

I was recently at a business that had a server out of action for two weeks because its processor had failed and the support company had difficulty sourcing a replacement.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NeilW
12th Dec 2005 14:51

Peers
You simply don't need centralised server systems in a small operation. It's easier and cheaper to replicate. Backup is merely a question of creating a replica on a peer via something like Ghost, and onto remove hard drives for offsite storage.

The reason why small businesses rely upon single machines rather than spreading their risk is because the people doing the work don't really understand what they are doing. They can only follow what Microsoft dictate.

NeilW

Thanks (0)
avatar
By listerramjet
12th Dec 2005 14:59

peer to peer vs server
sounds like an interesting debate is opening up here. I guess the incremental cost is significant but reducing for server over peer to peer, but what do you get for the extra cost?

I have seen peer or peer used with up to 5 users - primarily for Sage Line 50 and 3 ish users, but never on anything bigger.

I recall that for peer to peer there were problems if one node went down, and it was a pain if the user with the printer was not in, or worse still if the user with the Sage database!

perhaps someone with a more technical outlook would like to expand on this?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
12th Dec 2005 15:57

OK for 5 to 10 stations
Peer-to-peer networking: each PC is both a workstation and a server in its own right.

This is fine for very small environments, and works well. The "Server" flavours or Windows are very little different from the workstation variants.

Microsoft has however built in a limit - Windows "Professional" machines can only have five simulaneous connections. Once this limit is reached, additional connections are refused.

The main problem is that shares are either implemented with no user access controls, ie everyone can access everything in them, or each user that will access a share requires a user account on the computer that holds to share *as well as* the computer they are using. There is no central account database and no syncronisation of passwords.

Clearly, as the number of users increases this quickly becomes unworkable.

Conversely, there is nothing to stop a computer running some flavour of Windows Server being used as a desktop. But, with desktop PCs being so cheap I'm not sure there is really much point.

I would personally suggest an off-line backup media such as tape or DVD since this cannot be subject to virus attack.

Incidentally, a hidden albeit small cost of the "server" solution is that of power - an ML350 will chew its way through £400+ over three years.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
11th Dec 2005 09:45

Hello Justin
Justin, I'm intrigued by your comments. To clarify:

1. All Windows domains should have at least two domain controllers. The domain controller role provides user account and computer authentication. This takes only a few minutes to configure, and does not require any further software. Firstly, if the only one fails no-one can log on or access any network resources. Secondly if it suffers severe hardware failure the time required to restore the system, and hence loss of chargeable hours, would be much greater.

2. Hardware maintenance is frequently "double-charged" by small IT support companies as many do not realise what is provided "out-of-the-box" by quality vendors such as HP. Furthermore, this maintenance contract is often provided without a split of costs, hence the users often do not have visibility of the cost implications of new hardware.

Finally I do rather take exception to your remarks. I actually work in IT Auditing and advise clients on IT controls weakness through our analysis based on the COSO framework, environmental and data availability controls being key components of this. I also hold MCSE, CCNA, and am ACA qualified.

Regards

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
10th Dec 2005 03:27

Expensive PC spare parts
What one IT company did was they imported the memory chips from Singapore for this Malaysian customer whose PC memory chips got blown. The replacement costs is that of a mother board.

Where is the arithmetics? Aren't IT specialists trained in simple Mathematics economically. Certainly, they did not write the examinations of IMIS, BCS UK, Australian Computer Society. All these professional bodies incorporate a fair content of quantitative methods, mathematics into their syllabus.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
09th Dec 2005 13:25

several issues here
First, reliability of all mechanical components decreases rapidly after three years in servers. This is why they have three-year warantees usually.

That said I spotted a high end Proliant on ebay that didn't sell at its £120 asking price recently - so spares are cheap!

I would however suggest the machine is replaced unless it is well protected with redundant components (see below). Get the new hardware with a three year onsite warantee and hence no additional maintenance costs, which I'm sure your those cowboys are having pleasure stitching you up for.

If you only have one domain controller, keep this box as get it re-built as a secondary domain controller. You could also use it for other, non-critical functions like a Proxy Server, Citrix for remote access etc.

Installation. As already stated the Cowboys are really taking the ****. Project management time, aka Web Surfing in their office. Data migration time, aka web surfing in your office.

HP (Compaq) kit is totally rock solid and I wouldn't change your choice there. But make sure the monitoring software is actually being used, either by yourself or the Cowboys.

Spec the new machine with redundant PSUs, hardware RAID-5, two processors and two network cards configured for redundancy, as I presume your office is depending on this box.

Finally re machine specs. Modern hardware is way overkill for most small environments. Only four years ago I had 200 "general office" users connecting to a dual Pentium Pro Compaq Proliant, with NTFS compression enabled, and absolutely no performance issues.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By listerramjet
09th Dec 2005 09:17

in view of the posts
i would be inclined to add a third category of accountant, being one who is qualified but whose qualification route is chosen on the grounds that it is easy to get the qualification rather than that it confers any actual knowledge of accountancy.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By listerramjet
06th Dec 2005 15:18

hi justin
it is a similar problem with accountants. There are a number of professional qualifications, but a lot of "accountants" who do not have such a qualification.

so "buyer beware" applies!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By listerramjet
13th Dec 2005 09:01

to Prof TOTs (Sr)
network configuration is a little like IAS 39 - complex to the point of being incomprehensible.

I would suggest that accountants stick to accoutancy, and leave complex IT to members of the BCS or their ilk.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
02nd Dec 2005 17:12

I love accounting web
Not only does it provide useful relevant and timely information through its regular newswires, but you lot are all willing to help me with my specific problem. Thanks a lot.

I'm going to speak to our current IT provide and ask him what the hell he's playing at (more politely of course) and speak to some others. Thanks for the offers of quotes etc, but we're based in Scotland, about as far away from the South West as you can get.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
06th Dec 2005 07:12

An indicident of IT cheat(s)...
This is a true incident which I want to relate to the knowledge of all affected :

(A) My colleague's PC linked to a server network was "down" after the IT experts installed a certain programme recommended by their EXPERT-self.

(B) Company called IT experts over to fix problem. IT experts claimed to have fixed problem and left happily.

(C) Colleague happily continued to use her PC. Next, colleague off her PC and next minute her subordinate turn it on only to find out that a number of other programmes is not accessible.

(D) IT experts called in and "FIXED" problem and left.

(E) Colleague had to off her PC and after that her subordinate turned it on. Problem - can't find certain files and programs as message said "not accessible".

Question :

1) How many "problems" do you see in the above "run-around" problem experienced?

2) How many time do you think the IT experts would charge?

3) How do you think the IT experts managed to convince the colleague that it is not their faults?

4) How do you think the IT experts would convince the company that all their expertise is really professional and justified for settlement?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
06th Dec 2005 07:03

Justin
Is there any international or national bodies of IT professional bodies regulating or governing the ethics of IT professionals?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
05th Dec 2005 05:35

Ask your supplier to read this thread
Kenneth, would you agree with me on the above?

A company I know of engaged an IT company to look after their server and network. On and off there is consistent problem with the server, internet, which the company's administrator knew nothing about.

Thus, on and off, the IT company came and repeatedly serve and solve the same problem.

The problem is "more and more" problems the better and better for the IT company and it is easy peanuts solving the same problem which the network administrator knows nothing about IT and the more the administrator don't know the more often the IT company can come over and solve the little problem more often happily and bottom-line ----CHARGE MORE OFTEN and be MORE HAPPY to their HAPPY BANK account.

What a damn unprofessional IT company and what a damn idiot administrator because the administrator does not own the company and care less about the money spent on IT unnecessarily.

I think the IT company created the problem or could there be a "good money making relationships" developed between the IT company and the administrator? (key point - the administrator don't own the company)

Thanks (0)
By stratty
01st Dec 2005 16:38

Upgrades
In comparison...

Up until our poweredge 1800 purchase and upgrade to windows server 2003 our network happily serviced 25 users running from a box with NT4. Cpu was a whopping 450mhz!!! If it isnt broke do not fix it

The upgrade to 2003 server has however also resulted in a necessity to uplift our backbone to 100 meg; purchase new network switches etc.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
01st Dec 2005 13:05

Did it this weekend
Direct from HP ML350 G4, Hot plug,2GB, DAT72 internal tape, triple hard drive, windows 2003,
3yr onsite. Cost £3094.80.

Our software guy spent Saturday & Sunday on site and last Friday getting the server organised. A few minor glitches resolved on yesterday, all working OK.

Charges from our software guy will be about 3.5 days.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
01st Dec 2005 14:23

Details
We've 7 users accessing the server. 2 require remote access.

Software used is largely MS Office, MS Project, Sage Line 50. We have a lot of photo's on the server.

Plan is to use Small Business Server.

The installation time quoted includes 8 hours project management, 8 hours "hardware build and default configuration", 4 hours bespoke configuration, 8 hours data transfer and email migration and 12 hours desktop configuration. A total of 40 hours. I'd only glanced at the detail before posting my original comment, but looking at it in more detail, the installation time does seem pretty excessive.

I've been onto Dell's website and the price for the server configuration quoted doesn't seem excessive.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
01st Dec 2005 14:30

On-line backup
The suggestion that on-line backup is used rather than tape backup is interesting.

Does anyone have any recommendations? We've about 15Gb of files, as well as Exchange info, which I don't know the size of.

Thanks (0)
By stratty
01st Dec 2005 14:37

Offsite Backup
Tapes are indeed archaic and although more reliable than what they once where are not something I would trust the company's data with.

We use an offsite backup routine. Our online data currently runs to about 14 gig which is compressed to 4 gig.

You only get charged for the compressed data storage and our monthly invoice is £35 ex vat.

The site we use is www.databarracks.com and have found them to be great with support.

It is great not having to worry about swapping media (tapes or dvds) and letting the server backup automatically using our already present adsl connection.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NeilW
01st Dec 2005 15:30

Mmmm.
We've 7 users accessing the server. 2 require remote access.

I'd like to know what state your current server is in. I could run 7 users and 15Gb data easily an old Pentium III I got second hand from Ebay.

Servers last a very long time. The hard drives tend to go after about five years because they are mechanical devices, but the silicon stuff lasts.

It is this unnecessary churn that is the problem with the computer industry. They only make money when they are selling you something new.

To be perfectly honest I bet there are workstations in your office that could act as the filestores - assuming you needed them at all. You don't need a server with modern machines.

I'm shocked at the amount of money going to waste here.

NeilW

Thanks (0)
By stratty
01st Dec 2005 12:22

Cost of Server
We recently purchased a poweredge 1800 from Dell. This was a dual processor 2.8ghz xeon with a gigabyte of ram and 3 x 36 gig u320 scsi discs. Total price around £1200

I deal with the office networking as well as my main position of tax senior.

Personally I think £7.7k for a new server and transfer of operating system is a joke and you should be able to do this for around £5k easily.

If you would like any advice or an alternative opinion please feel free to email me.

[email protected]

Thanks (0)
avatar
By kfosborne
30th Nov 2005 16:56

Thanks for your comments.

The memory upgrade itself is £358 for 2 x 72Gb hard drives. The rest is for a new DAT machine and tapes, and backup software upgrade.

The £7.7k quote is for the £3.8k for server (Dell PowerEdge 1800 @ £1,985), DAT tape and software; and £3.9k for the installation and configuration.

I'm still not sure if my current 3.5 year old Compaq Proliant ML350 is likely to die on me in the next year or so.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NeilW
30th Nov 2005 12:25

!!!!!!
You want to spend £7700 on a new server. Are you planning on running a small planet with it? Or is your software just badly written?

You can get a brand new Dell SC1420 server with 4Gb of memory and 240Gb of RAID 5 protected disk space for £1560.

And you can get cheaper than that if you move away from the brand names.

I presume the majority of the cost is software upgrades.

NeilW

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Cant Add Up
30th Nov 2005 18:12

I'll do it for you a lot cheaper
Where are you??

Ps...can also lay laminate flooring at reasonable rates.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By listerramjet
30th Nov 2005 13:26

i'm with neil
even the upgrade cost you mention sounds somewhat excessive - you should get some more quotes!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
07th Dec 2005 11:00

I love it...
...when people who know very little, try and give us suggestions.

The postings here get more and more bizarre every time I read them.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
02nd Dec 2005 03:02

Justin
Another way of looking at it is the supplier is not honest. He wants more to charge more to get more to end up more and anything but more.

Thanks (0)