Just built my first 1U Server.

T

talkwebhosts.co

New member
CASE: 1U Rackmount
CPU: P4 2.4 GHZ
MOTHERBOARD: 8I865GVMK
MEMOREY: 512 MB PC 2700
HD: 80 GB Western Digital Serial ATA

Those are the specs of the server. It runs well and CentOs installed without a problem. If anyone is interested in one of these servers let me know. I can also colocate them for $100 a month in a California Data Center. Overall it was a great build!
 
On a pseudo-related note, why use SATA and not SCSI? I would think seek time is a major factor in web servers, and 10k SCSI drives have a 30% advantage. All these dedicated providers use SATA. I've seen SCSI drives in the $150 range, so I wouldn't think that the issue?

-- HW
 
ZiDev said:
On a pseudo-related note, why use SATA and not SCSI? I would think seek time is a major factor in web servers, and 10k SCSI drives have a 30% advantage. All these dedicated providers use SATA. I've seen SCSI drives in the $150 range, so I wouldn't think that the issue?

-- HW
Click to expand...
Hey ZiDev,

I wanted to make the most dependable solution possible. SCSI has its quirks and can be tedious to setup. To be honest with you most people that I have spoken too about servers really don't care whether its ATA, SATA or SCSI they are more concerned with dependability and the amount of storage a solution provides. I am actually opening up a Rhino Rack within a few days, where I will sell cost efficient rack solutions and have been testing the market with individuals to see what they prefer.

Anyways thanks for the questions.
 
frattay22 said:
You got any pics of it?
Click to expand...
I will be taking some pics soon. The lighting has been bad lately here in Los Angeles due to all of the rain. I wanted to use natural lighting in the pictures and not flash. I will keep you posted on how it goes!
 
TheReason said:
Hey ZiDev,

I wanted to make the most dependable solution possible. SCSI has its quirks and can be tedious to setup. To be honest with you most people that I have spoken too about servers really don't care whether its ATA, SATA or SCSI they are more concerned with dependability and the amount of storage a solution provides. I am actually opening up a Rhino Rack within a few days, where I will sell cost efficient rack solutions and have been testing the market with individuals to see what they prefer.

Anyways thanks for the questions.
Click to expand...
scsi used to have quirks years ago - but really is now the only standard for server reliability. I wouldnt and could never advise a ata HD in a server.

Most non-tech people go on cost for servers - if they think they can save ?150 on the hard disk going for ata - they will, but they probably dont really know the difference.
 
If disk i/o is not a requirement then ata will do or sata, but if you want the increased performance in disk operation then scsi is the way to go.
Cost is usually the reason for opting on a less expensive solution, and you maximize profits that way, but to each his\her own.
-bones
 
SCSI is not limited to only being good as a db server, since your requirements may dictate that sata or ata will suffice.
If the amount of reads and writes pose a problem then scsi will do fine.
Using SATA may be best for you in your given situation and thats Ok too you know. :)
-Bones
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top