ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review

    Starwind
    supermicro homelab miniserver networking cluster ram supermicro superserver
    9
    22
    4.7k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • OksanaO
      Oksana
      last edited by

      alt text
      Supermicro company, ranking one of the leading positions in server development, has recently released two compact servers: SuperServer E200-8D and SuperServer E300-8D. Delivering powerful characteristics together with minimal deployment space, these servers become a perfect fit for educational purposes, virtualization and running minor networking and firewall applications or security appliances.

      Read the full article by Alex Khorolets, a technical support engineer at StarWind to learn more about Supermicro servers

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
      • DustinB3403D
        DustinB3403
        last edited by

        Interesting read, how well would something like this work with Starwinds VSAN?

        travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • travisdh1T
          travisdh1 @DustinB3403
          last edited by

          @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

          Interesting read, how well would something like this work with Starwinds VSAN?

          Not so great. You can only have a single storage device.

          DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • DustinB3403D
            DustinB3403 @travisdh1
            last edited by

            @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

            travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DustinB3403D
              DustinB3403
              last edited by

              As a standalone hypervisor I see something like this as reasonable-esk.

              But I have my reservations about it. A system like this seems to push the "buy a SAN" for storage if you need it.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • travisdh1T
                travisdh1 @DustinB3403
                last edited by

                @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                DustinB3403D matteo nunziatiM 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • DustinB3403D
                  DustinB3403 @travisdh1
                  last edited by

                  @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                  @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                  @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                  Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                  Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                  The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                  dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • dafyreD
                    dafyre @DustinB3403
                    last edited by

                    @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                    @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                    @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                    @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                    Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                    Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                    The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                    But if you were building this in a Starwind setup, you wouldn't' need RAID at all.

                    DustinB3403D scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • DustinB3403D
                      DustinB3403 @dafyre
                      last edited by

                      @dafyre said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                      @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                      @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                      @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                      @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                      Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                      Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                      The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                      But if you were building this in a Starwind setup, you wouldn't' need RAID at all.

                      I suppose, but you're also very limited to the amount of storage you could fit into any single host.

                      OksanaO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller @dafyre
                        last edited by

                        @dafyre said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                        @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                        @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                        @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                        @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                        Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                        Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                        The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                        But if you were building this in a Starwind setup, you wouldn't' need RAID at all.

                        You do. SW doesn't provide the RAID. You'd need KVM software raid.

                        dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • dafyreD
                          dafyre @scottalanmiller
                          last edited by dafyre

                          @scottalanmiller said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                          @dafyre said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                          @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                          @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                          @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                          @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                          Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                          Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                          The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                          But if you were building this in a Starwind setup, you wouldn't' need RAID at all.

                          You do. SW doesn't provide the RAID. You'd need KVM software raid.

                          If we're talking about systems with a single disk running with Starwind... If the disk in host 1 dies, everything fails over to host 2, and stays up.

                          It's not ideal by any stretch of the imagination. But in this case, Starwind saves the day.

                          Edit: Thus why I say you don't NEED raid.

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • DustinB3403D
                            DustinB3403
                            last edited by

                            But at this price point for server equipment and a single disk, why not just operate your environment off of a consumer grade desktop if SW is going to be taking the reigns.

                            Why spend more for the equipment. Just spend $300 on 1+X systems, use SW and be done with it.

                            (devils advocate above).

                            coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • coliverC
                              coliver @DustinB3403
                              last edited by

                              @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                              But at this price point for server equipment and a single disk, why not just operate your environment off of a consumer grade desktop if SW is going to be taking the reigns.

                              Why spend more for the equipment. Just spend $300 on 1+X systems, use SW and be done with it.

                              (devils advocate above).

                              Enterprise support is the big one. Even in the RAIN model you'll still need to be able to recover individual nodes in a quicker then usual manner.

                              But that all comes out to what the business needs. If the risk of having little to no support is less then the cost of the support then you have your answer.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • scottalanmillerS
                                scottalanmiller @dafyre
                                last edited by

                                @dafyre said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @scottalanmiller said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @dafyre said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @travisdh1 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                @travisdh1 Yeah I saw that, which was why I was asking about it.

                                Just taking a quick look at the pricing, you can get those smaller Dell servers with 4 3.5" bays for less, at least in the US.

                                Could get a lot of equipment for the price (only ~$900) if you're willing to use refurb equipment. If we're only discussing new servers it would limit the choices a bit.

                                The single drive limit means no raid functionality to deal with, which also means no raid redundancy. . .

                                But if you were building this in a Starwind setup, you wouldn't' need RAID at all.

                                You do. SW doesn't provide the RAID. You'd need KVM software raid.

                                If we're talking about systems with a single disk running with Starwind... If the disk in host 1 dies, everything fails over to host 2, and stays up.

                                It's not ideal by any stretch of the imagination. But in this case, Starwind saves the day.

                                Edit: Thus why I say you don't NEED raid.

                                I see. Just single disk systems. You could do that with Nucs.

                                DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                • DustinB3403D
                                  DustinB3403 @scottalanmiller
                                  last edited by

                                  @scottalanmiller said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                  I see. Just single disk systems. You could do that with Nucs.

                                  Exactly, you could go with the cheapest possible hardware solution that your hypervisor could run on. Not even care if a single host were to die. Just introduce a new device if one does go down.

                                  travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • travisdh1T
                                    travisdh1 @DustinB3403
                                    last edited by

                                    @DustinB3403 said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in Supermicro SuperServer E200-8D and E300-8D – review:

                                    I see. Just single disk systems. You could do that with Nucs.

                                    Exactly, you could go with the cheapest possible hardware solution that your hypervisor could run on. Not even care if a single host were to die. Just introduce a new device if one does go down.

                                    alt text

                                    DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                                    • DustinB3403D
                                      DustinB3403 @travisdh1
                                      last edited by

                                      @travisdh1 Exactly. . .

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                      • momurdaM
                                        momurda
                                        last edited by

                                        The single HD for storage(use m.2 for hypervisor) seems to be worrisome; however the multiple 10GbE is awesome.
                                        I dont know the last time i encountered a failing/failed hd in my home. Many years now. I still have Gen I Sata drives that work from like 6 computers ago.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller
                                          last edited by

                                          It's really a compute node or lab box.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • OksanaO
                                            Oksana @DustinB3403
                                            last edited by

                                            @DustinB3403 Agree, but in most cases, 4TB HDD will be enough for a small home lab. The key is to build a cluster out of those servers, excluding an additional RAID feature.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 1 / 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post