Posts made by 1337

@scottalanmiller said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

R1

I like how you abbreviated the abbreviation there and saved two characters of redundant bandwidth!
:thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up:

Hard skills is where the rubber meets the road. I believe soft skills are actually easier to learn and as a society we put too much stock into it.

Considering all infrastructure options in the cloud with your typical shared VMs, dedicated VMs, dedicated hosts, bare metal servers etc. When is colocation the right choice?

It's been a number of years since doing this but I need to turn a couple of old Win 2003 and 2008 Servers into VMs on xenserver and run them there until they can be migrated to a newer OS.

What's the best way of doing P2V these days?

@romo Thanks! What browser are you using in the screenshots above?

Todays websites uses a lot of client-side javascript with frameworks upon frameworks upon frameworks.

If a website is slow and some pages takes seconds to appear on a desktop computer, what tools could be used to find out where all the time is spent?

I'm thinking about:

• time for the http request from the user to the webserver (network latency)
• time it takes for the webserver to process the request
  • time spent in the database
  • time spent in Ruby/PHP/Java whatever
• time it takes to send back all the data needed from the server to the client
• time it takes for the client to process and render the page

Any suggestions for tools to analyze this?

@dave247, @dashrender said two 4TB SATA/SAS SSDs in RAID1, not HDDs.

Exactly. A RAID 1 SSD pair - be it SAS/SATA or NVMe will just crush the current storage system you have in place.

current system = 260/520 IOPs
RAID 1 SSD = 25,000/50,000 IOPs.

Single midrange NVME drive, Intel DC P4510 4TB
113,500/625,500 IOPS

Same drive as above but SATA version, Intel D3 S4510 2TB
35,500/97,000 IOPS

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/ssd-nvme-overview-video.html

@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@darek-hamann said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

Before the RAID array type is selected, it would be great to know the workload in terms of write operations. For RAID5/6 write performance will be significantly lower than that of RAID10 on the same disks. Just bear that in mind.

Right, but compared to today, we are writing to six 10K RPM drives in a RAID5 config. This server is something like 6 years old and performance is acceptable. Going to new hardware, especially faster RPM drives or SSD drives will be a significant improvement.

OK I guess that's a good enough baseline then.

A RAID 1 two 4 TB SATA/SAS SSDs would crush your current system and save you a bundle.

Yeah, I was wondering that same thing actually. If I just purchased two 4TB 7.2K RPM 6Gbps SATA drives, would that actually be better than my current config as well as have the same level of reliability as the SAS drives?

I wanted to go with SSD since they are obviously way faster and last longer, in the event that we don't upgrade again for another 7 years or something.

Absolutely not.

@dave247, @dashrender said two 4TB SATA/SAS SSDs in RAID1, not HDDs.

@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@pete-s said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@dustinb3403 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@pete-s except the cost per GB is even more for U.2 drives than it is for the traditional formats.

Depends on how you calculate. One NVMe drive, say 4TB, it will beat the performance of four 1TB SATA SSD drives in RAID0. If you take 4x1TB drives and a raid controller the 4TB NVMe will be cheaper or similar. So per IOPS the NVMe drives are cheaper. And total failure rate is lower because you need fewer drives to accomplish the same thing.

If you on the other side take a 4TB NVMe drive compared to a 4TB SATA SSD you will pay about 25% premium for the NVMe drive. Intel for instance have their DC series of drives that are available both in SATA and NVMe which makes it easier to compare apples to apples.

Except in your RAID example above you totally miss that the OP wants hardware protection. So a RAID card is required regardless (either onboard real RAID 1 for your dual drive setup, or add-in card).

I didn't miss it, I just compared it performance wise. You could do RAID1 with two NVME drives but that would be some something like Intel RST (motherboard) so low cost. If you want a RAID controller that can come close to that, you need something very expensive, and then the 8x1TB SSD in RAID10 to go with it.

@dustinb3403 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:

@pete-s except the cost per GB is even more for U.2 drives than it is for the traditional formats.

Depends on how you calculate. One NVMe drive, say 4TB, it will beat the performance of four 1TB SATA SSD drives in RAID0. If you take 4x1TB drives and a raid controller the 4TB NVMe will be cheaper or similar. So per IOPS the NVMe drives are cheaper. And total failure rate is lower because you need fewer drives to accomplish the same thing.

If you on the other side take a 4TB NVMe drive compared to a 4TB SATA SSD you will pay about 25% premium for the NVMe drive. Intel for instance have their DC series of drives that are available both in SATA and NVMe which makes it easier to compare apples to apples.

@dave247 Really no need to buy SATA/SAS SSDs anymore for new servers when U.2 NVMe SSDs are readily available and Dell have plenty of servers that can do hotplug NVMe drives. And NVMe are very superior in every way to SATA/SAS.

U.2 is 2.5" drives but fatter than regular SSDs and have better cooling and 4 lane PCIe bus connection. Comes in sizes from about 0.5TB up to 8TB per drive and whatever DWPD you need.

For good quality budget option you might want to have a look at Hikvision. Very large manufacturer that also makes a lot of OEM stuff for others and have a lot of different models for different applications.

Haven't tried them myself but I would check them out if I was buying.

https://hikvision.com

@dustinb3403 said in Recommendations for Cameras:

@pete-s said in Recommendations for Cameras:

Of course you can't have Ubiquiti IP cameras. Can't have "home" equipment when you're talking about a serious installation with 80-100 cameras in two locations.

hahah. . . but Wyze camera's were considered. . .

This will be next!

@nerdydad Alright, but how about finding out what companies in the region would offer for your current needs?

Of course you can't have Ubiquiti IP cameras. Can't have "home" equipment when you're talking about a serious installation with 80-100 cameras in two locations.

You need to look at this from a physical security perspective, not from a network gear perspective.

Obviously you are going to have some serious cabling and installation to be done as well so the entire project isn't just about buying a few IP cameras. You need to look at companies that does installations of this size and see what brands they offer. There are many brands but big ones are for example Sony, Axis, Canon. So start by finding out what CCTV suppliers and installers you have in your region and get some quotes on what you need.

PS. The "look" your boss wants is from the outdoor housings. But not all cameras needs outdoor housings, it depends on what they are going to be used for and the environmental conditions it mounted in.

I have experience with Axis in plants and they are good. Also have some experience with D-link Business IP cameras in plants and they worked fine but if they are a good choice or not would depend on the kind of support you can get.

And how about SQL server express? It's was likely the 2008 version.

Should I anticipate any big changes there or is it likely that the SQL will run the way it is?

BTW, I saw that SQL Server Express 2017 runs on linux as well?!?

I don't have access to the old system but I imagine it being PHP 5.x since PHP 5 was the only stable version under development in 2008 according to wikipedia. And this is from 2010/2011 something.

Is using the MS Web Platform Installer the best way to install this?

PS, it will for sure run on a virtualized server.

I have backup files from an intranet webapp that was developed 7-8 years ago, running on Win 2003 with IIS, Sql Express and PHP using MS PHP driver (sqlsrv).

What is the best/recommended/easiest way to install PHP, SQL Server Express, IIS on Windows Server 2016?

I want this up and running with a minimum of change to the PHP code.

How many and what size monitors are you going to use?

I've found that screen estate and if you have multiple monitors or not, make a big difference to how well or not the user interface actually works.

Something that works great on a tiny 13" laptop is likely a disaster on triple 27" monitors but might be passable on a larger 43" monitor.

I was planning to get an AMD Epyc server for testing but as you mentioned you can't do live migration between Intel and AMD hosts. So I figured I need at least two nodes, preferably more. With enough memory and storage it adds up so from a budget perspective it didn't make sense. In the end I got a couple of refurbished servers instead with Intel CPUs.