Small server replacement ideas

In My Humble Opinion
1

I need a new server for the house, and none of the plain vanilla options seems quite right. Some input and opinionizing appreciated.

What I have is a very beefy server chassis with a Xeon processor, 4GB RAM, a mobo RAID-1 boot drive and a 3Ware hardware RAID-5 array. (Actually, I have two - one in service and one that’s been in cold backup for a few years.)

Both run Windows Server 2003 Enterprise. (MEGA overkill, but I got the licenses cheap about 8-9 years ago.) This version ran off the support rails earlier this month, and while I’m not worried about security issues, I am already running into small compatibility problems, such as with AVG Business Edition. The running server also has the cripple factor of a bad update chain, so there are around 70 updates that I can’t get it to apply, and I lack patience and time to unknot the problems.

What I need is pretty simple - high reliability file storage with fast access times (I work with a lot of big graphics and CAD files), file service for up to five or six users, and the ability to run scheduled backups to a separate NAS. The ability to run Windows services is a plus, since I run the wireless network manager on the server for general access.

I’d like to re-use one or the other of these expensive, high-grade chassis, which goes against buying a NAS. NAS also has a steep price curve when you get to RAID-5 and fast file access - the home-grade single-disk units run by a bitty Linux controller really won’t do it. (I have two of those, Buffalo Terastations. Fast in, deadly slow out.) I’d rather not drop $1500 on a NAS.

I also need reliable backup, which seems to be hit or miss with NAS units - if it’s built-in, it’s not very feature-rich; if it relies on another network node, I would need to run the backup tool from my workstation or such, not very convenient.

Software upgrade: I could go to Win2K8 Server for about $5-800. More than I’d like to spend if I can avoid it, and it’s getting old as well. Win2K12 is closer to $1k and much more tightly licensed and controlled; my needs are simple but I’d like to keep the ability to add users and such without buying CALs I might only need for a few weeks. The advantage would be that I’d keep much the same server, software load, general setup, etc.

I can hear the Linux crowd jumping up and down. I’ve tried to like Linux but I really have grown past the point of assembling my own software from a box of Legos and endlessly tinkering at Level Esoteric-6 to keep it running and updated. I’ll listen, though. (I’d also like to keep the RAID-5 array untouched, and I am not sure if I can easily migrate it to a Linux base without reformatting and reloading 2TB of data.) (Linux and the Linux world also hate-hate-hate on software RAID and trying to preserve that mirrored boot drive has proven difficult to impossible in past attempts. I’ve taken ridiculous abuse just asking about the possibilities.)

Or…? What am I overlooking among the choices of:

[ul]
[li]WIndows Server update on the same box. (Cost and licensing issues.)[/li][li]Linux conversion of the same box. (File, time and maintenance issues.)[/li][li]Switch to pro or semi-pro NAS. (Cost and backup issues.)[/li][/ul]
?
(And no, cloud solutions are not options, not for 2TB of data I need fast access to, never mind cost and security issues.)

2

Before I write a longwinded response (short version: build an Ubuntu box), there’s one important thing I need to mention.

If you’re not worried about security issues, why are you running AVG? Running a version of Windows that’s no longer supported is a much larger security risk than anything AVG is going to find and correct.

3

Closed network, no outside access of any kind except through a very limited number protected user workstations. It’s essentially a file server only, and AVG/BE has provided adequate protection for going on a decade. AVG is for virus and trojan protection alone.

ETA: It’s AVG anti-virus only, not the full-spectrum protection. I have a SonicWALL HW firewall/router as well.

ETA2: it looks as if I can rebuild the backup server under Win2K8 for about $350, then migrate the data and/or drive array from the working server. I’d have to see a good cost/time/value/longevity argument to move to Linux. (At the $1k-1.2k for Win2K12, it would be much easier. But a few more years at that cost of time and effort is tilting the scales.)

4

What you’re describing is akin to installing an anti-theft device on your car, but leaving it parked with the door open and keys in the ignition.

5

So to summarize what I think you said: You’re happy with your hardware and your expectations of its remaining reliable lifespan. But W2K3 going off support is the straw that breaks your overall camel.

If so, then don’t fix what’s not broken. Get W2K12 on your current hardware which will get you the longest future service life. On a dollars / year basis it’ll be cheaper than W2K8.
If you really want to keep to a budget and you’re a bit unscrupulous, then look into this: https://mspartner.microsoft.com/en/us/Pages/Membership/action-pack.aspx

You subscribe as a IT pro kinda guy, somebody who puts together server systems for small businesses. You get all the latest and greatest software and CALs for $475. Then a year later you don’t renew your subscription. The terms of your licenses say you then need to uninstall everything you got. But nobody actually uninstalls that stuff and (at least as of a few years ago) there was no automated enforcement.

Check it out.
Digging a bit deeper, I question the validity of your assumptions about remaining reliable hardware life. But I’m not close enough to it to do more than suggest you think long and carefully about that issue.

6

I know old hardware has sentimental value sometimes. But considering the offerings from contemporary NAS vendors like Synology and so forth, re-using that old stuff pretty much just amounts to a waste of electricity.

7

All good points, thanks.

I am simply not worried about security on the system - not behind a hardware firewall with all WAN access blocked at both hardware/router and software levels. Getting infected files is my primary worry, and so far AVG on all workstations and the server has limited that problem. I’m open to discussion about why this is terribly naive or unsafe. I am getting away from Win2K3 for many reasons, the increasing security holes being one of them. Good enough? :slight_smile:

The current hardware may be reaching old age, but the backup server (all premium-plus components) has only about a year of runtime on it. I’m willing to give it a shot and rely on a sturdy backup schedule.

I am willing to slide a little on licensing at such a small level (my current copies were IT evaluation and allowed essentially unlimited CALs and devices). I don’t know if my account with MS is current or not but I can look.