+1. While 5 or 6 years ago 3 year server replacements were the norm, that's no longer the case. By the time you put together server cost, OS license, and migration consulting costs, a small business is unwilling to pay $10 or so to upgrade their SBS box or exchange server just because it's old. We're running into many more aged hardware issues than we used to, and some of them are ugly.
*********************** Charlie Kaiser [email protected] Kingman, AZ *********************** > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Goldoff [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 6:29 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: How would you go about this? > > "You get five years out of a server? I think you need the help." > > > > *or* YOU are luckily spoiled ! > > > > Yes, a 3 year lifecycle refresh is ideal, but not realistic > budget-wise for MANY out there in the real world. Especially > in the SMB market, I frequently run into aging servers with > some of my consulting clients. You'd be hard pressed to > convince them to replace a server that is currently working > as expected with new hardware and/or new OS without proving > any significant benefit in features over the existing > systems. The biggest issue on aging servers that I see is > drive failures, and insufficient drive space/size due to data > growth. Data volumes can be replaced/upgraded without an > entirely new server in many if not most cases. > > > > That said, we all know that Windows 2000 ( all flavors > including servers ) are dropping from Microsoft support July > 12th this year. So the lack of support, service packs, and > vulnerability fixes *will* be a driving factor for OS > upgrades which work out well with hardware upgrades > > Erik Goldoff > > IT Consultant > > Systems, Networks, & Security > > ' Security is an ongoing process, not a one time event ! ' > > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 9:15 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: How would you go about this? > > > > You get five years out of a server? I think you need the > help. I was just looking for some help in picking up a file > server. I replace all my workstations and servers every three > years. But I only have 130 workstations and servers. > > > > Your growth estimate is OK as it increases here at the > Museum. That is why I am splitting the data onto several HDs. > Thanks for your help. > > > > From: Jonathan Link [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 4:18 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: How would you go about this? > > > > I'm not going to answer your question, instead I'm going to > pick apart your request. > > We really don't have any idea of what your rate of data > growth is. There are two estimates we can make from the data > supplied, linear growth or geometric growth. With linear, > you're adding about 125 GB of data per year. With geometric > you're doubling your data every ~19 months. So, if you > expect the same growth rate, in 5 years (assumed life of a > server) you're at either +625 GB of data or over 8 TB of data. > > Just taking a step back and looking at it from 30,000 feet, a > server is the least of your storage concerns if you're > doubling your data every 19 months or so. > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Holstrom, Don > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have a file server that has gone above 1 TB. When I first > came here to the museum a few years ago (8), they had 33 gigs > of data on one server. I brought in file tape backups until > last year when the backup went out of that range. > > I always used SCSI RAIDs but even now that is a bit high. > > So > > I have ordered a new file server with six HD openings. I am > figuring a pair of 10,000-rpm 150 or 300 gig HDs for the OS, > I can go Server 03 or 08, figuring on 08. I would back up one > with the other. Then for data, two 2TBS backed up for the > main data and two 1.5 or less for other data, also backed up. > Then I could/would backup to external 2TB drives for longevity. > > What thinkist thee? Is there another way I should go? Data > here will continue to increase at the same rate... > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource > hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
