New Server Setup - Sanity Check

gettig · 07-11-2006, 04:00 PM

Hi folks,

I've been searching and reading past posts, but haven't seen exactly what I am looking for.

I have a new dual G5 Xserve, 2 GB RAM, two 80 GB hard drives, and a 500 GB drive. My original thought was to wipe the system and mirror the 80 GB drives and use the 500 GB for data. After reading and thinking more about it, here's what I'm considering:

80 GB Drive 1: operating system
80 GB Drive 2: mail store, backup files, maybe an image of the system OS
500 GB Drive: Users and data shares

At this time, we have about 20 users. The server is going to handle file/print sharing, DHCP/DNS, email, webmail, iChat, Open Directory authentication, remote access VPN, and nightly backup. I do have a utility Linux server that I could move DHCP/DNS and backups to, but those are minimal impact on server performance during office hours. I anticipate moving to 40-50 users over the next 18 months. The email and webmail will be port forwarded through the firewall. I anticipate adding another Mac server and possibly a SAN in 12 to 18 months.

The current Windows server will have the data migrated from it and be repurposed (probably as an Intranet server). Bye bye, Microsoft Exchange!

Nightly, I want to backup the data drive to an external 35/70 DLT drive. Granted, not everything in the shared folders will fit on one tape, but I'm OK with that for now. I will be selective.

Some of the content on that will fairly static.

I was considering partitioning the drives like I would a Linux box, but the truth is I have a pretty simple setup here. With a recent image of the OS and data available on tape, I'm thinking I should be able to recover from a disaster without too much trouble.

The risks as I see them:

1) If I don't partition, and I have a runaway log file at some point that fills up the root partition, wouldn't I be hosed? A separate partition for /var/log would help mitigate that risk.

2) Having the OS on only one drive (not mirrored) means I'll have extra effort to get back up and running should I ever have a drive failure. Not that we're running anything here that can't wait a day. Worst case: I setup a Linux box and restore data to an external hard drive. We would lose any changes since the last backup, but it's better than nothing. I don't remember specifically adding a RAID controller to my order...does an Xserve come with one out of the box?

Am I nuts? Or does this look like a plan that will work? I've never deployed a Mac server, so I'm looking for any kind of sanity check on this plan. Thanks in advance!

Tony

giskard22 · 07-12-2006, 12:14 PM

Welcome to the limitations of 3 drive bays.

Hardware RAID is not included with an Xserve unless you added it, but the OS can do RAID 1 in software. Apple's RAID software has a reputation for failing to rebuild damaged sets, though Server 10.4.7's release notes indicate improvements. Think of it this way: if you do RAID 1, it'll keep the server from going down if one of the disks dies, but you may end up restoring from backup (at a convenient time) anyway.

There's software called SoftRAID that has an excellent reputation for providing reliable software RAID. You could look into using that instead.

If you go RAID, I'd address any worries about a runaway log file with a cron job that checks the free space on the OS volume every N minutes. Choose a threshold and have it email you if it gets too full.

I don't think OS X itself backs up to tape very well. What I mean is that you can do tape backup for data, but you can't restore from tape to get a complete bootable system volume. For that reason, I'd want to go RAID 1 for the boot disk.

My other thought is that a single 500 GB mechanism might have enough space for your user data, but it's not fast enough to efficiently do network homes for more than a few users (especially if they work with large files). If you're going to do network homes for 20 users, you'll need some sort of high-speed RAID like an external SATA box (if you've got $3k to spend) or an Xserve RAID (if you've got $10k to spend). Oh, and if you're doing network homes at all you'll want the server to have a gigabit connection.

gettig · 07-12-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by giskard22


	Welcome to the limitations of 3 drive bays.

Hey, three is better than two in the HP pizza boxes I had at my previous employer.

Quote:


	... There's software called SoftRAID that has an excellent reputation for providing reliable software RAID. You could look into using that instead. If you go RAID, I'd address any worries about a runaway log file with a cron job that checks the free space on the OS volume every N minutes. Choose a threshold and have it email you if it gets too full.

Cool. I will check out SoftRAID. The cron idea is excellent. Thank you.

The more I think about it, I may just get external hard drives for backup. Then I could do a weekly full and a differential daily. The tape drive I thought I had is not available now.

Quote:


	My other thought is that a single 500 GB mechanism might have enough space for your user data, but it's not fast enough to efficiently do network homes for more than a few users (especially if they work with large files). If ...

Let me make sure I understand this. I'm going to want that kind of disk performance if my users have their ~/ directory on the server. Right? If they have their home directory stored on the workstation and just attached to shares as needed, then I would be OK with what I have? I will be able to add an external SATA or Xserve RAID in a year, no prob. But right now, cash is tight because of the greater construction project going on here.

The server will have a gig connection to the switch. The workstations will connect at 100 MB.

What about this, assuming I don't mirror the 80 GB drives:

80 GB Drive 1: operating system
80 GB Drive 2: User homes
500 GB Drive: Mail store and data shares

Thanks for your input on this.

giskard22 · 07-12-2006, 04:20 PM

You have a couple of options for the homes. If you're using 10.4 all around you can have Portable Home Directories, which means the data is stored locally and synced to the server. It cuts down on server workload, and if someone has to move to a different machine the majority of their data will follow.

Otherwise, just have the homes be local to each workstation, and keep shared data on the server.

If you're not going to do any mirroring, it's completely up to you how you arrange the data. As you know, don't give users the ability to accidentally fill the server's boot drive; keep user-accessible shares off the boot volume.

gettig · 07-12-2006, 04:27 PM

Thanks, giskard. I really do appreciate the feedback. This is my first Mac server deployment, but I know there will be more. Yes, it's 10.4 all around.

Yes, I will definitely keep the users away from the boot drive.

acme.mail.order · 07-13-2006, 04:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by giskard22


	I'd address any worries about a runaway log file with a cron job that checks the free space on the OS volume every N minutes. Choose a threshold and have it email you if it gets too full.

This function comes preinstalled. Just needs to be configured.

/usr/sbin/diskspacemonitor
/etc/diskspacemonitor/*.conf

and fiddle the system crontab.

Small headache with the 10.3 version - it didn't check that a volume was read-write before complaining that it's full, so every mounted DMG or inserted CD resulted in messages. Fortunately it's a shell script so was easy to change.

Virtual1 · 07-23-2006, 12:37 PM

There are a lot of options for backup and safety so I hope you are asking a lot of people and making sure they fully understand your needs. It's usually expensive, difficult, and disruptive to change your mind later.

I just helped fix up an xserve last week. It was 3 drive, level 1 software raid, no video card. Why do ppl buy xserves without video cards? Anyway, we got a raid and video card installed, ditto'd their striped volume off to an external lacie, reformatted raid5 (w/megaraid) and ditto'd the data back. then set them up a script to rsync their new raid to the lacie weekly.

Hopefully they get their tape backup fixed, as this is still not an ideal solution, but it's a mile better than what they had a week ago! They've been "on grace" for the last five months, and for a business, that is a very scarry thing.

07-23-2006, 12:37 PM	#7
Virtual1 Triple-A Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Waterloo, IA Posts: 200	options There are a lot of options for backup and safety so I hope you are asking a lot of people and making sure they fully understand your needs. It's usually expensive, difficult, and disruptive to change your mind later. I just helped fix up an xserve last week. It was 3 drive, level 1 software raid, no video card. Why do ppl buy xserves without video cards? Anyway, we got a raid and video card installed, ditto'd their striped volume off to an external lacie, reformatted raid5 (w/megaraid) and ditto'd the data back. then set them up a script to rsync their new raid to the lacie weekly. Hopefully they get their tape backup fixed, as this is still not an ideal solution, but it's a mile better than what they had a week ago! They've been "on grace" for the last five months, and for a business, that is a very scarry thing.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

07-11-2006, 04:00 PM	#1
gettig Prospect Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2	Hi folks, I've been searching and reading past posts, but haven't seen exactly what I am looking for. I have a new dual G5 Xserve, 2 GB RAM, two 80 GB hard drives, and a 500 GB drive. My original thought was to wipe the system and mirror the 80 GB drives and use the 500 GB for data. After reading and thinking more about it, here's what I'm considering: 80 GB Drive 1: operating system 80 GB Drive 2: mail store, backup files, maybe an image of the system OS 500 GB Drive: Users and data shares At this time, we have about 20 users. The server is going to handle file/print sharing, DHCP/DNS, email, webmail, iChat, Open Directory authentication, remote access VPN, and nightly backup. I do have a utility Linux server that I could move DHCP/DNS and backups to, but those are minimal impact on server performance during office hours. I anticipate moving to 40-50 users over the next 18 months. The email and webmail will be port forwarded through the firewall. I anticipate adding another Mac server and possibly a SAN in 12 to 18 months. The current Windows server will have the data migrated from it and be repurposed (probably as an Intranet server). Bye bye, Microsoft Exchange! Nightly, I want to backup the data drive to an external 35/70 DLT drive. Granted, not everything in the shared folders will fit on one tape, but I'm OK with that for now. I will be selective. Some of the content on that will fairly static. I was considering partitioning the drives like I would a Linux box, but the truth is I have a pretty simple setup here. With a recent image of the OS and data available on tape, I'm thinking I should be able to recover from a disaster without too much trouble. The risks as I see them: 1) If I don't partition, and I have a runaway log file at some point that fills up the root partition, wouldn't I be hosed? A separate partition for /var/log would help mitigate that risk. 2) Having the OS on only one drive (not mirrored) means I'll have extra effort to get back up and running should I ever have a drive failure. Not that we're running anything here that can't wait a day. Worst case: I setup a Linux box and restore data to an external hard drive. We would lose any changes since the last backup, but it's better than nothing. I don't remember specifically adding a RAID controller to my order...does an Xserve come with one out of the box? Am I nuts? Or does this look like a plan that will work? I've never deployed a Mac server, so I'm looking for any kind of sanity check on this plan. Thanks in advance! Tony

07-12-2006, 12:14 PM	#2
giskard22 Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,272	Welcome to the limitations of 3 drive bays. Hardware RAID is not included with an Xserve unless you added it, but the OS can do RAID 1 in software. Apple's RAID software has a reputation for failing to rebuild damaged sets, though Server 10.4.7's release notes indicate improvements. Think of it this way: if you do RAID 1, it'll keep the server from going down if one of the disks dies, but you may end up restoring from backup (at a convenient time) anyway. There's software called SoftRAID that has an excellent reputation for providing reliable software RAID. You could look into using that instead. If you go RAID, I'd address any worries about a runaway log file with a cron job that checks the free space on the OS volume every N minutes. Choose a threshold and have it email you if it gets too full. I don't think OS X itself backs up to tape very well. What I mean is that you can do tape backup for data, but you can't restore from tape to get a complete bootable system volume. For that reason, I'd want to go RAID 1 for the boot disk. My other thought is that a single 500 GB mechanism might have enough space for your user data, but it's not fast enough to efficiently do network homes for more than a few users (especially if they work with large files). If you're going to do network homes for 20 users, you'll need some sort of high-speed RAID like an external SATA box (if you've got $3k to spend) or an Xserve RAID (if you've got $10k to spend). Oh, and if you're doing network homes at all you'll want the server to have a gigabit connection.

07-12-2006, 04:20 PM	#4
giskard22 Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,272	You have a couple of options for the homes. If you're using 10.4 all around you can have Portable Home Directories, which means the data is stored locally and synced to the server. It cuts down on server workload, and if someone has to move to a different machine the majority of their data will follow. Otherwise, just have the homes be local to each workstation, and keep shared data on the server. If you're not going to do any mirroring, it's completely up to you how you arrange the data. As you know, don't give users the ability to accidentally fill the server's boot drive; keep user-accessible shares off the boot volume.

07-12-2006, 04:27 PM	#5
gettig Prospect Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2	Thanks, giskard. I really do appreciate the feedback. This is my first Mac server deployment, but I know there will be more. Yes, it's 10.4 all around. Yes, I will definitely keep the users away from the boot drive.