[THIN] Re: Hardware - Blades, SAN?

  • From: Jeff Malczewski <jmalczewski@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:55:58 -0400

I was doing some research on the IBM HS20's, and basically, the way we
configure our servers, it would not become a cost saving (or a space saving,
etc) option until you purchased more than 7 servers..  The chassis takes up
7U, and if you divide out the cost, I could get 7 1U (x335) servers with
hardware SCSI RAID for the same money..  The HS20's only have IDE drives in
them.  If you want SCSI, the SCSI cage takes up the adjacent slot, reducing
you from 14 servers per 7U back down to 7 servers per 7U, which I can
already do now, for less $$$ than the blade solution would cost..
 
While they look pretty cool, and I'm sure they have their niche, they won't
see the inside of my server room until a few more generations of them have
come and gone and their featureset improves...
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Grecsek [mailto:grecsek@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 5:31 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Hardware - Blades, SAN?



We're trying to determine which way to go with our backend hardware for our
Citrix farm...I've been hearing a lot about these blade servers and was
wondering if we should setup our farm on a slew of blades and tie it into a
SAN? Seems like the optimal configuration for a ton of users running basic
apps like Office, IE, Acrobat, etc. 

 

Was wondering if anyone had any feedback regarding a setup like this - have
you done it, advisable, not really, pro/cons, etc. 

 

   


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. thin
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2004