New server for Small business

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
5,226
Location
Overground, underground..
Our office has expanded from 4 PCs networked peer-to-peer to 10-12 PC & laptops, most running Windows 10 Home.

We've been quoted £3k + VAT for a Synology NAS with 4x3TB in RAID 5, 2 x 4TB for backup and an 800VA UPS. The quote doesn't sopecifically say what the backup system is.
The quote is for hardware only. This sounds very expensive to me.

We can backup all our data files to a 128GB flash drive. I don't think we'll need 9TB of storage!
We're not transferring gigabytes of data around, more like kilobytes. The network is gigabit capable.

for £3k I figure we could get a Windows 2016 Server Essentials system, an external drive (or two) for backups, and upgrade everything to Windows 10 Pro.

I'm not clued up on server systems, but I would be right in saying that my proposal gives us a lot more flexibility and security. One of the things we would like to implement is hot-desking.


Any of you more knowledgeable folks have any advice?
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
26,102
Start with your requirements and work from there. With such a small file count I'd be surprised if you can't do everything you need to do with an Office 365 / Azure AD / Intune subscription - helpfully all bundled together in https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business

That gives you some device security, control over BitLocker enforcement, central storage of encryption keys, etc etc. £3k of capital spend for a non-redundant server that doesn't provide anything new to you seems like a waste.
 
Associate
Joined
19 May 2014
Posts
290
To be honest, for what you need, a £3k Synology is overkill. We started off with a small Dell server, and Windows 2012 Essentials and did exactly what you want, but with larger files.

My suggestion (if you don't want to go down the cloud route) would be to spend ~£1000 on a good server (Dell have some cracking servers on their outlet store), and get yourself 4 x 1TB drives for a RAID setup, get a ~£350 Synology 4 bay NAS with some 2TB-4TB drives for backups, stick Windows 2016 Essentials on the server, and let Windows 2016 Essentials manage the backups to the NAS. Windows Server 2016 Essentials has a built in backup system that can also backup all the workstation PC's at a time you choose, so the bigger the hard drives for your backups, the better.

You should be able to do the above for well under £3k (last time I looked, you could get a Dell r330 server on the Dell Outlet store for £500).
 
Associate
Joined
19 May 2014
Posts
290
Are you able to post what they are quoting for? Any chance you can source the hardware yourself rather than using this other company?

I think you can achieve hot desking with a Synology because one of the apps in th Synology software is an active directory server, but I still think a proper server would be better.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
5,226
Location
Overground, underground..
I've been asked to specify and price up a server.

My thoughts are:
HPE ProLiant MicroServer Gen10 X3216 8GB 4LFF NHP SATA Entry Server - Is it worth getting a more powerful CPU and more memory?
Windows 2016 server essentials
Stablebit Drivepool and Scanner
250GB SSD for the OS - Is it worth getting 2 and having them in RAID 1?
2 x 1TB HDD for storage - 1TB useable with Drivepool
1 x 1TB external for on-site backup
2 x 1TB portable for offsite backup (will also use a cloud backup service)

All that should cost under £1000. :)

Do HP provide any extended warranty plans?

Is it possible to buy the basic server direct from HP?
 
Soldato
Joined
16 May 2007
Posts
3,220
This type of a requirement can be a bit of a minefield if you don't consider it carefully.

Since you have poorer internet speed an on site device makes sense. I would think about the below list :-

Resilience: To be useful and used as a business critical data storage tool it needs raided disks, dual power supplies, a UPS. This reduces the risk / impact of component failure.

Backup & DR : Assume the server dies completely or you have a fire in the worst case can you survive without the data?
If the server is backed up to tape and the tapes stored in a fire safe or off site it means you still have your data. Think about this and a recovery plan if the worst happens.

Users data : structure your shared areas carefully so only the people who need to have access.

Users machines : Laptops can be dropped , stolen or fail. At this point most users realise the didn't do the backup they were asked to do and have lost everything. You may feel the costs for an automatic backup to the server is a good idea for laptops but make sure you have enough storage.

Support : make sure you get a level of support you can live with. Again until things go wrong people often don't see the true costs of cheap solutions. Think about the SLA for various events such as complete hardware failure and rebuilding the server from scratch using for example backup tapes. Or more routine tasks like monitoring server health , security patching / av and monitoring backups.

The main thing is understand what you want, go for a good value solution with risks you understand / accept and never gamble on a cheap , poorly spec'ed solution which has numerous unknown hidden risks.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
5,226
Location
Overground, underground..
Resilience. This would be software RAID by Drivepool. We already have UPSs because we quite often have blackouts.

Backup & DR. Current backup of all our data (including ~7 years of data logging) occupies about 80GB. We also make use of 'free' cloud storage (dropbox, onedrive etc) for some files. Backing up to onsite and offsite external HDs mean we can plug them into any PC if we need to access the data.

Users data. One of the reasons we want to implement hot-desking. All user data would be stored on the server.

Support. Our IT people are happy to support what hardware we have and provide. Our server is mainly just for file storage. No SQL databases (whatever they are) etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 May 2007
Posts
3,220
That sounds like you are going in the right direction, I was assuming you did not have your own experienced IT people which would make things potentially more problematic.

Once piece of advice is to avoid software raid as it is less resilient and more problematic. Best to have full hardware raid with separate raid arrays for OS and the data. That way if the OS fails you still have your data and it gives better resilience also better tools to manage disks. Hardware raid is independent of the OS and does not depend on the OS in the way software raid does

Software raid should not be used on production environments.

Hope that helps.
 
Associate
Joined
3 May 2009
Posts
805
I work for a small IT consultancy, who deal day in and day out with companies of your size - a few more things to consider.

Growth - Putting in a cheaper solution now is fine, however if you grow another 10 users will this cope? Buy a server that has expandability. Ill cover this more shortly, but see it as a 3-5 year investment.

Downtime - If your server is down for a day, and those 10 current people cannot work - how much does that cost your business? Take wages, Project delays, unable to process work, customers losing faith, no emails etc. With this number you are more equipped to determine your actual requirements.

Cloud - You say you have lots of power outages but dont want to go cloud, you should try high impact, low footprint services such as email in the cloud. Outlook in cached mode with sensibly sized mailboxes should be no issue here and any downtime you have on site wont affect the ability to email customers. IMAP mailboxes are OK but very old hat, especially if you want a hot desking setup, POP3 is awful - avoid - o365 if setup correctly end users can do themselves in 3 clicks.

A Business critical server should atleast have the following, otherwise its not that critical to your business:

Redundant power supplies - no explanation needed

Hardware RAID -
Avoid stablebit, software raid or anything else, you wont see any gains at this level other than cost reduction, hardware raid is not expensive and plenty more reliable, ensure it has battery backup (usually optional extra but will save your bacon) and a flash based cache.

Enough Capacity for growth -
Memory and Disks are cheap, go with more than you need, backups should be sized at 2.5x the data to be backed up as a rough sizing guide allowing for plenty of history.

Virtualise
- Hyper-V is painless and you will thank me, it doesn't overcomplicate much and allows you to be completely hardware agnostic if you have a total server failure. Restore those virtual machines onto anything that runs Hyper-V and away you go. Dont install anything on the host OS other than the Hyper-V role and it will be very stable. Windows licensing grants you 2 virtual machines.

Decent Backup system - Don't use windows integrated backup, its better than it was but look towards backupassist or Ideally Veeam, you should also be testing your backups at least monthly, actually restoring a subset of important files and checking they open OK or testing your custom application if you use one (sage or other accounts software)

You will find an ML350 a good benchmark server or DL360/380 for rack. I would steer clear of NAS devices if your above 5+ users, whilst feature rich they generally have poor support and will cost you more in downtime than a well maintained server..

Support - Maintain hardware warranty on your server and have spare switches etc. I guess a large chunk of your costs are actually installation costs from your IT company. They are likely advising solutions they have worked with and tested, if you suddenly go against the grain you are going to be reducing their effectiveness in responding to support issues - again this is where your time lost £££ per hour comes in. If you have a special setup because you've gone cheap and cheerful and the vendor support in taiwan takes 2 weeks to respond to your issue, or you have no support at all - this is going to cost you money in the long run.

Saying they will support anything is probably incorrect - i'd get this checked over before you commit to anything and have a conversation with them, if anything goes wrong its down to you to fix if your speccing a quoting, this is what a proportion of your support costs come from - if they spec it they support and recommend it.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
27 Apr 2007
Posts
3,068
as above, I've just bought a dl360, 4 300gb hard drives, 3 x 16gb to compliment the existing supplied 16gb ram and windows 2012 r2 for around 3k. strip the extra unnecessary ram and you could use that on a small nas system and a belt and braces removable drive or two.
 
Associate
Joined
27 Oct 2008
Posts
1,898
Location
Gloucester
Nothing wrong with a NAS for your backup store. We back up 80 VM's on a network with 3000+ users to two Synology SAN's in different buildings.
In fact. We deploy them to every site we build.
Granted they're not entry level but some of the rack mounted Synology's are not far spec wise from the ones you use at home.
 
Associate
Joined
19 May 2014
Posts
290
Nothing wrong with a NAS for your backup store. We back up 80 VM's on a network with 3000+ users to two Synology SAN's in different buildings.
In fact. We deploy them to every site we build.
Granted they're not entry level but some of the rack mounted Synology's are not far spec wise from the ones you use at home.
We've just upgraded our network and will be buying a £400 Synology NAS for backups to start with. Hopefully that will be sufficient :)
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
18,642
Location
Aberdeen
Just to expand on @ashrobbo's comment about the cost of downtime, consider having a second server chassis - no disks but everything else - available in case the first goes pop. Just pull the drives from the old server and put them in the new one.
 
Back
Top Bottom