Thanks Derek, awesome case.... But I thought maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree by trying to get a rack mountable system which has both CPU and storage. Should I be looking at perhaps getting a 1U rack and then a separate direct attached storage system? That could be the 2,3,4U chassis. The only thing is I'm not too familiar with them and I'm worried about the reliability of such a configuration.
On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 09:52 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: > Maybe build a server around the norco RPC-4224 case? > > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811219038 > > -derek > > On Mon, June 23, 2014 9:41 am, Stephen Adler wrote: > > You guys have given me some great feed back. Thanks! > > > > Another question. As I try and configure this server which I'm getting > > for work, the key issue is its ability to have a lot of hot swappable > > disks. what I'm seeing these days is a migration to the 2.5" drives away > > from the 3.5". The problem is the 2.5" drives only go up to 1 terabyte, > > while the 3.5" drives go up to 6 terabytes. so what's up with this 2.5" > > drive bit. The literature says that they consume less power (the 2.5" > > drives) and are the favorite for data centers. But there's a factor of 3 > > difference between the storage capacity and size. so the problem is that > > I have very few options when it comes to buying a rack mounted server > > with 3.5" hot swap-able drives. there seems to be a lot more rack > > servers with 2.5" drive bays. > > > > Can anyone recommend a system with 16 3.5" drive bays? > > > > On Sun, 2014-06-22 at 14:14 +0000, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote: > >> > From: [email protected] [mailto:discuss- > >> > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Bogstad > >> > > >> > Actual media that you can take physically offline may still have > >> merit. > >> > >> I've heard tons of horror stories where some company's data, including > >> all backups, were destroyed instantly. Not just redundancy, but backups > >> too. > >> > >> I know of ONE company, where the only reason the company survived was > >> because the CEO had a copy of the core IP on his iPod. > >> > >> Offsite and Offline. No substitute. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
