> I can't answer this question specifically, but I can offer suggestions for
> posing a better question;
> You should specify any additional services the box will be running, so that
> prospective answer-writers don't have to guess. For example, are your
> developers using a shell account on the box and compiling code locally? Or
> are they running compile tools on their desktop machines and using the file
> server in question as an NFS repository? Will the box be running any other
> services like netatalk or LDAP...?
> > Hi,
> > I would appreciate any help deciding how much hardware to order
> > for a linux-based fileserver we want for our company.
> > We want to serve files for about 60-100 employees using NFS and
> > Samba. About 40 of these will be software developers possibly
> > running multiple compilations simultaneously. The following
> > is the configuration we are considering:
> > Pentium III 800 MHz
> > 256 MB Ram.
> > Raid 5
> > Mycelex controller.
> > Would this be sufficient, or do we need a beefier box?
> > Thanks for any help. Please post replies to this newsgroup.
> > George.
> > --
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
I agree with the "need more info" assesment. However, 40 developers
compiling on the same box? I will start by assuming you mean doing the
compilations on the server and not locally. If so, then you are not even
close! This configuration would cover about 4 users compiling on it.
This assumes no remote X usage as well. Given the configuration though,
it makes more sense that you are doing the compilations on the users
local machine and then transfering files using smb or nfs. This makes
more sense. But, if you are using code control tools on the fileserver,
then the config again probably comes up short. A good rule of thumb
(well, maybe not good, but safe) is one proposed by Sun when I asked
them about how big a server I should get given a fixed number of people
and fixed workload (fileserver basically). They said that as long as it
is only IO, then you could say 30 users per CPU. This number drops
quickly as you get into more CPU intensive applications such as X or
gcc. Given that this is strictly marketing hype, then you might
extrapolate to 50 people per CPU, and figure 256 MB of ram per CPU for a
robust fileserver. I would say for the simple fileserver case, then you
would want a slower dual CPU (consider the Xeon at 500Mhz, excellent for
this kind of thing) with 512 MB or more of ram. The raid is an excellent
choice and needs no extra thought. Good luck.
remove nospam and replace with putzin to reply to me!
-- True believer in any OS other than MS!