Re: [Fed-Talk] Sizing Mini Server for email
Re: [Fed-Talk] Sizing Mini Server for email
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Sizing Mini Server for email
- From: "Nichols, Jared - 1160 - MITLL" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:51:15 -0500
- Acceptlanguage: en-US
- Thread-topic: [Fed-Talk] Sizing Mini Server for email
Title: Re: [Fed-Talk] Sizing Mini Server for email
I'm not quite sure how many 9's you really need for an email server.
To me, a lot :) Though, it’s difference of environments. If your number 1 concern is data retention, then sure a Mini can do it. Though, I’m not sure what kind of setup you’re going with if a drive failure will end up with you doing a “swap-over from one machine to another.” Can you elaborate?
j
On 12/18/09 9:38 AM, "David Emery" <email@hidden> wrote:
I'm not quite sure how many 9's you really need for an email server. To
me the #1 concern is preventing data loss. Past that, a couple of
minutes of downtime to do a swap-over from one machine to another is
acceptable. The Mini gets us started, it's not a final solution.
dave
Nichols, Jared - 1160 - MITLL wrote:
> The thing I’d worry about with the Mini server is not computational
> load as I’m sure it could handled hundreds of email accounts without
> much of a problem – the tech specs look like it could handle it
> (though perhaps I’d like more than 4GB of RAM).
>
> What I’d /really /worry about is redundancy. There’s only 1 NIC, so
> you can’t bond them for interface redundancy and there’s only 1 power
> supply. Also, the drive setup is not ideal for reliability-required
> situations. Only two drives means that you’re doing a RAID 1 if you’re
> looking for redundancy. And, in that case, if one drive fails, you’ve
> still got downtime because you need to crack the case open to replace
> the drive. In that case, I’d worry about computational power –
> rebuilding the RAID array while trying to keep email service up and
> speedy may be a bit taxing.
>
> What the real server-class hardware gets you (independent of Mac vs
> Windows) is hardware redundancy and the ability to hot-swap
> components. While the price of the Mini is /extremely/ attractive, for
> something as critical as email in an office where that downtime isn’t
> acceptable (if it is, by all means get one) I wouldn’t go for it.
>
> Don’t let the price blind you to the serviceability and reliability
> requirements :)
>
> j
>
> On 12/17/09 6:00 PM, "David Emery" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Has anyone seen any numbers/projections/rules-of-thumb for how many
> email users a Mac Mini Server whose primary duty is email server (POP,
> IMAP, SMPT) will handle? I'm interested in computational load, not
> disk
> space... What motivated this was an exchange with a corporate IT
> person. "We're investing in Exchange upgrades." "Yeah, but I bet
> you're spending a lot more than the $1k for a Mini Server..." The fair
> question is whether a Mini Server would handle the load.
>
> dave
>
> --
> David Emery, DSCI, supporting PdM SW Integration, PM NSI
> 703 298 3473 (office/cell), 703 272 7496 (fax)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
>
> ---
> Jared F. Nichols
> Desktop Engineer, Infrastructure and Operations
> Information Services Department
> MIT Lincoln Laboratory
> 244 Wood Street
> Lexington, Massachusetts 02420
> 781.981.5436
>
--
David Emery, DSCI, supporting PdM SW Integration, PM NSI
703 298 3473 (office/cell), 703 272 7496 (fax)
---
Jared F. Nichols
Desktop Engineer, Infrastructure and Operations
Information Services Department
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
Lexington, Massachusetts 02420
781.981.5436
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden