Henrik is right, the 420-R definitely would be the best choice among
these three - dual CPU's, dual power supplies, better network
performance, ability to RAID mirror the disks, more expandability in
terms of additional network cards (can even use quad ethernet cards).
The SCSI disks in the 420-R usually last longer than the IDE disks in
the other two machines, and the 420-R is easier to get parts for
nowadays (at least in the USA).
Dean Casey
-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Stoerner [mailto:user-ce4a2c883f75@xymon.invalid]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 12:34 AM
To: user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
Subject: Re: [hobbit] Estimating hardware needs for Hobbit server
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 04:50:13PM -0600, Haertig, David F (Dave) wrote:
I'm currently running my Hobbit server/Apache on Linux-based Dell
Dimension desktop [...]
I found some older Sun hardware in the lab that I'm considering using
as
a replacement, but I don't know how it's specs would compare. I'm not
familiar with Sun/Sparc hardware all that much. Can anyone comment on
if what I've scrounged up might be adequate? At most, I'd expect to
eventually monitor several dozen servers, but probably no more than
100.
Ultra 5
Ultra 10 (350 MGz, 512 MB RAM)
E420R (2 - 450 MHz CPUs, 2 GB RAM)
Ultra 5 and 10 are desktop systems. The E420 is a server-class system,
but all of them are fairly old - I have all of these at work, and they
were probably bought some 6-8 years ago.
But Hobbit doesn't require much hardware. My production Hobbit server
is a Sun E220, which is a bit smaller than your E420. And I'm running
a Hobbit installation with more than 3000 hosts monitored.
So all of these boxes have enough power to run your Hobbit setup.
If you're free to choose, then I'd pick the E420 - it has some
server-side goodies like RAID disks with hotswap that the other
two don't have. And there's room for running a couple of heavy
Hobbit add-on scripts.
Regards,
Henrik