[Zero]

Hi!

I'm in the process of setting up a Macintosh file server that will double as my workstation so that I can learn and support Mac OS X this summer, but I'm not real sure as to what components I should include in my Mac. Here's what I want to do:

* Diagnostic application sharing,
* Host and distribute fully loaded OS and software images to Macs that need a "wipe and load" done on them,
* Host and distribute software updates,
* Host a small web site on my own domain,
* Host a small FTP site on my own domain, and
* Use it as a Mac OS X workstation.

No more than 5 or 6 Macs will be using the server's resources at any one time.

Here's what I was looking at for my system, perhaps you guys can help me hammer out the dents in my plan.

I'm going on some of the Mac support boards and asking what kinds of servers people are running, maybe I can hammer out the dents in the plan I have for the file server/OS X support computer.

Here's what I'm planning, maybe you can help me work out the dents in the plan too:

* 733 MHz G4
* Not sure what kind of drive I'll have, I was told by a couple of Mac file server guys I know that IDE would cause things to bottleneck during big file transfers, but I'll need something big and fast, preferably SCSI.
* CD-RW (for the occasional Jim Lourie customer that wants all their old data burned onto CD so they can use it at home)
* Studio speakers (because happy employees are productive employees!
* 15 or 17" flat panel monitor (see above)
* Delete ZIP drive and replace with 1 GB JAZ drive (for backups of the images), or another storage solution
* 2nd 10/100 NIC (to go to the 100 MB switch that the Macs in service will connect to)
* Maybe AppleShare IP? From the little things I've read about it, I can tell that it's some kind of file sharing management software.

Thank you very much in advance!

------------------
- Zero

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited 05-21-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited 05-21-2001).]

[macvillage.net]

Sounds, good.


Unless you have large files that these users are accessing, or you do photoshop/vid production work, you really don't need a SCSI drive, you would be more than fine with an IDE drive. It wouldn't be worth it. 5 users most likely wouldn't warrent an expensive SCSI system.

------------------
Robert Accettura
Owner/Webmaster of

[larkost]

I guess you might already know this, but MacOS X Server came out yesterday. It is the replacement for AppleShareIP, and fills those boots admirably. Once this WebObjects 5 (also released yesterday) server next to me gets up and running in our co-lo I will start putting together a workgroup server base on MacOS X Server (10.0). I have been using that software since (pre) 1.0 days and am looking forward to my first 10.0 box.

It has easy administration for netbooting (much better than the wiping/restoring you are thinking of.. but puts more stress on the server), Apache (WebServing), FTP, CIFS (Windows FileSharing), NFS (UNIX FileShareing), WebDAV (cross platform FileSharing), MacintoshManager (Windows ZAK on steroids), and lots of other acronyms. And there is nothing stopping you from using the box as a workstation (remembering that if you really screw up, you can take down your clients too).

I don't think that the 733 is the best way of going though.. get the Dual 533.. less money and better performance for this sort of thing. Lots of RAM of course, and you can pour some of the money you saved from not going with the 733 into UltraSCSI drives (faster). the drives will be nice, but are not a make-or-break issue for this sort of application... the RAM is though... And it sounds like you only need the 10 client License, and if you can get the educational price.. that looks mighty nice (I am stuck with full price.. or rather my employer is).

[cube-dude]

Transfering to the OS X - Server forum. Find thread there.

[This message has been edited by cube-dude (edited 05-22-2001).]

[cowerd]

Granite Digital has some nice Firewire RAID systems if you need the throughput without the SCSI cost, and firewire shouldn't hit the CPU as hard as IDE.

Find another backup medium--the Jaz drives are absolute shite. Prone to write errors, fragile, short shelf life and just plain frightening to think about as a backup device. Get an extra 60GB drive and then set up a real archiving system. You'll sleep better at night.

[greggomer1]

Uhm, I thought the Granite FireWire Raid was uses IDE's behind a firewire bridge stripped in a Raid. I am curoius how this will reduce CPU usage over a IDE Raid?

Thanks,

Greg

[larkost]

The reason FireWire RAID systems won't hit the CPU as much as a regular IDE disk, is that the RAID system presents the RAID array as an opaque unit to the OS, and does all of the IDE interface(s) work itself. So what the OS sees is a FireWire drive, it does not see the individual IDE drives at all, let alone having to deal with all the micro-management that IDE requires.

The other reason that this system could be faster is that the FireWire chip on Macs has direct access to memory (minus some security checks), so that it can execute a transfer with little-to-no involvement from the CPU. Even SCSI cannot boast this. I have always worried about the security/virus implications of this setup, but all the FireWire Engineers I have talked to have indicated that this is not an issue (without explaining why).

[cowerd]

Did a little more checking into Granite Firewire RAID, and its not hardware RAID. They include Charismac RIAD software, so its no go for OSXS. Would be nive if it was real hardware RAID. sorry...

[jarends]

If this is just for you to use, there is no reason to go for a 733mhz machine with scsi drives. You'd want that for a production machine.

You can save some money and get something slower, and IDE disks will be just fine. When I play with win2000 server for testing stuff, I don't go out and buy some big expensive server to test it on. We just use a celeron. It runs fine for 2 connected users, and then when the time comes, we install it on a server.

You could probably just use an imac or a cube.

I wouldn't use this as your primary machine though. You'll learn more if the server is another machine.

With the money that you would have used to buy that crazy rig, but an imac with 256 megs of ram for the server, and a more modest G4 workstation for yourself.

[This message has been edited by jarends (edited 05-29-2001).]