Furosh One wrote:
Hey guys, Happy New Years to all you!
I just wanted to ask for your recommendation on our fossology setup
and planning for this year.
Currently we have the multi-fossology setup with 6 machines and it's
working great (thanks to all your hand-holding :-)!!!
We have the setup in one of our lab benches and are trying to decide
if we should leave the existing setup in place, place it into
production in the server room, or purchase new hardware to consolidate
the multi-setup into a "single" faster Server-class rack-mountable
machine.
Our fossology project has gotten some really high-visibility with
management and they definitely see the need for it due to our code
review and Intellectual Property and Compliance guidelines.
So my question is I currently have the 6 machines which consiste of
(mostly all):
(6) Machines -
(1) Server (DB, Web Server, Scheduler)
(5) Fossology Agents/Distributed Repos
* Dual-Core (2) Intel 6400 2.13 Ghz CPUs
* 4 GB RAM (mainly 4 GB, except for 1 or 2)
* 150 GB SATA II 3.0 Hard Drives
Considering getting (1) Rack-mountable DELL server with:
* (2) Intel® Xeon® X5560, 2.8Ghz, 8M Cache,Turbo, HT, 1333MHz Max Mem
(Each CPU is a Quad-Core (4) CPU, which should equate to
having (8) CPUs for our setup.)
* 24 GB 1333MHz Memory for 2 processors
* 1TB 7.2K RPM SAS Hard Drive
* Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.3 x64 Operating System
So obviously this is a really nice server, almost a why would I be
asking or what's not to like question right?
Well just wondering about anything that would absolutely NOT work like
the OS (we were using Ubuntu prior but RHEL 5 has better
backup/restore capabilities since we use Veritas Netbackup), or any
bottlenecks compared to the multi-setup we got right now. And we're
obviously trying to save space and go away from the 6 Tower machines
we got. We're investing money into the hardware but need to return the
existing hardware back to IT for new employees as well.
So any feedback/suggestions/recommendations would be appreciated?
-Regards,
Gibran Marquez
Gibran,
Thanks for the interest. I'm sure the Dell system is nice. Our project
is sponsored by HP, so I'm going to suggest an HP solution instead.
Why? Not because we work for HP. I believe that the HP is a better
product and that HP can provide better service IMHO.
A comparable model would be a HP ProLiant BL460c G6, in a c3000
enclosure (will fit up to 8 blades).( The dell has a little faster
memory). I would recommend a different disk setup. Use internal disks
on the blades for the OS, and apps, but get a storage raid and store the
fossology data on that. You can carve up the array so that each blade
has a good chunk of the array.
I'm not the best on the hardware, maybe Dan will chime in as he does
all the hardware for our project. Anyway both the BL and DL line of
ProLiant blades are nice products.
The msa family is nice. I'm using one on my development cluster.
http://h18006.www1.hp.com/storage/disk_storage/msa_diskarrays/drive_enclosures/index.html?jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN
RedHat should work fine. We tend to run Debian (lenny) as we like the
apt set up much better than rpms. Yum isn't bad. We will be using a
redhat set up at some point as that's what a lot of folks use in business.
Hope that helps.
--
Mark Donohoe
OS&T, Cupertino CA.
fossology.org
_______________________________________________
fossology mailing list
[email protected]
http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
