Search Again:

Re: Need a recommendation

From: Mia''s Virtual Post Office
Date: Saturday, April 5, 2003
Time: 11:17:26 am


On Friday, April 4, 2003, at 01:05 PM, andrew kagan wrote:

> Hi All: I'm contemplating colo'ing a few servers. One would be DNS and
> the
> other mail (EIMS).
>
> I currently have (locally) QDNS3.5 running on OS9 on one desktop box
> and
> EIMS 3.2 on OS9 on a second desktop box.
>
> I'm trying to consume as few U's as possible.

Well two towers do not take up that much space. Are you being charged
per U?
>
> As I see it, I have the following options:
>
> Option 1:
> Use a 1U case for an IMAC, and run QuickDNS on OS9.

You could use a Marathon iRack and run OX. They are easy to build:
irack.mia.net

> Use a 1U case for an IMAC and run EIMS 3.2 on OS9.

Again, would work just fine.

> Pros: low cost, stable and secure

Well, not low cost to build, but I suppose if you are being charged per
U (assuming colo's still do that) then the recurring cost savings may
outway that.

Sure the Marathon units have been stable and work just fine, however
you give up expandability and dual drives/RAID, etc.. But then again
you can use a firewire drive for backup.

> Cons: disk access is primary importance on an EIMS server, and the
> IMAC only
> supports ATA, whereas I'd prefer U320 SCSI for the EIMS server.

There again another con. Of course (and many argue this point) I have
not really seen a huge difference between SCSI and IDE now-a-days in
terms of speed. In any event with SCSI you are back up to the
Tower/Desktop set up again, that or a Xserve, which is going to be a
bit more expensive.
>
> Alternative: Put a G3/G4 in a 4U case with SCSI drives for the EIMS
> server...but now I'm at 5U.

Well a tower is only 4 U. Why not use a mid tower? Again, is your
colo charging you per U?
>
> Option 2:
> Get an XServe and run OSX native versions of Quick DNS and EIMS.
> Pros: Fast; everything in 1U, ability to stably run both apps on a
> single
> box (?).
> Cons: Cost of an XServe; EIMS for OSX may be in beta for some time.

Yeah, you could do that as well. Again, much more expensive, probably
overkill, and IMHO the Xserve takes up more space and eats more power
than a Tower. Also, if you are not taking advantage of OSX on the
XServe it is kinda pointless to have one. EIMS is not ready for prime
time yet on OSX, hence the reason I mention that.
>
> I haven't experimented with QuickDNS for OSX, but the QDNS list has
> been
> very quiet, so I'm assuming it's working pretty well if it's configured
> properly.

QDNS for OSX is extremely stable. Remember OSX is running BIND and
QDNS is just a management tool, not the actual DNS server. It works
wonderfully. EIMS however, again, is not ready for OSX..
>
> I'd welcome any comments or observations.
>

I'd go the tower route and find a colo that does not charge per U, but
charges based on:

1. Bandwidth
2. Power
3. Space

All rolled into one. Real estate is the cheapest part of the equation
in the colo business and given the current state of the economy for
several years there is plenty of it available.


Regards,
Jeremy Anthony Kinsey
e-mail: jer@mia.net Colocation - Web Hosting - Wireless
________________________________________________________
Bella Mia, Inc. www.mia.net
401 Host Drive www.dslone.com
Lake Geneva, WI. 53147 www.hostdrive.com
Phone: (262)248-6759 www.bella-mia.com
Fax: (262)248-6959




Messages In This Thread:



Return to Digital Point Solutions' Home Page