View Full Version : Emac as a server

06-30-2002, 05:08 PM
It occurred to me that the $1000 would make a fine os x server for our LAN, with a firewire RAID attached, I think it would be more than fast enough for even a 100/1000 network and even for the large file transers.

any reactions?

07-03-2002, 01:54 AM

Absolutely. We have 5 different servers running, and they range from G4 733s all the way down to a G3 333 (as well as a shiny new emac being used to edit video). If you are comfortable with the performance of the firewire raid, then you are set to go. None of the servers we are running are hindered by processor performace, but it really depends on exactly what you want to serve, and processor speed alone is usually not the deciding factor of overall performance, especially in a server.

My expereince is that The Gurus (and most others who are deep into mission critical servers) prefer SCSI - fast, reliable, tried and true. But things seem to be changing. The new Xserve, with it's hot-swap ATA drives may be the wave of the future for all but the most I/O intesive setups. But all 4 drives are on seperate buses, so not fair to compare to an external array choked through one firewire port at about 25 to 30 megs per second. . .

You just have to decide if SCSI is needed for your situation. There are plenty of real Gurus lurking around here that can help answer that question if you need to weigh the pros and cons.

Other than SCSI, what are the shortcomings?

1) Harder/longer to open if you need to get at hardware, 100 bus speed vs. 133 for G4 towers (along with faster DDR memory, new system architecture, in a couple weeks at Macworld NY *we hope*)

2) no real expansion choices (if you added the firewire RAID, then you are down to one firewire port for tape backup device, etc)

3) Will the firewire array with ATA drives be reliable, compared to SCSI?

4) Only two memory slots. Enough?

That's all that comes to mind at the moment. Seems like drive performance/reliability is the biggest deal-breaker. . .can you live with it?

[This message has been edited by newbie (edited 03 July 2002).]

07-28-2002, 08:32 AM
thanks for the response. I didn't notice the post until now.
let me answer soemthing and get a reponse if you will

since it is a file server, serving hires image files (tifs and psds copied across a 100T LAN, ranging in size from 30mb to 400mb) wouldn't be limited speed of the firewire raid be moot? I mean, we only get around 2 megs per sec anyway, right? there would only be 2 or 3 clients at the same time maximum.

next question, and this should be its own post--
should i stick with ASIP 6.3 and stay at 9.2, or need I go OSX and do OSX server?

thanks a lot!


07-28-2002, 11:12 AM
My expererience happens to address both issues.

Had a user who wanted to log into his box from home, but could not because of our firewall/security rules. So we put all his docs on a an external firewire drive and plugged it into our OS X Server G4, tha twas accessable from outside the LAN. He was very happy with performance both at work over the 100bt LAN, and from home over DSL.

You could always test the same way: plug in a firewire drive to your ASIP server and share some data. Fast and easy way to see exactly what you should expect.

As for switching from ASIP, if I had it to do over I think I would have stuck with it until Server 10.2 was out. My opinion: run ASIP another month or two and watch for posts as Server 10.2 rolls out.

We switched just after server 10.1 came out, and even though it has been good overall, we have had a few minor yet nagging problems. I am no X Server guru though, and there is lots all over the web aboout Server X. You can start with Apple of cousre; there are discussion groups and admin mail lists full of questions, problems, and answers.

[This message has been edited by newbie (edited 28 July 2002).]