Server Upgrade

CrazyKiller

CrazyKiller

Poster
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Messages
232
Just thought some of you fellow geeks would be interested in seeing some pictures of my personal server that I upgraded earlier this year:

DTG729 (my server)

dtg729.jpg


Server before the upgrades:

before.jpg


New Server Memory:

newmemory.jpg


New Server CPU (Intel E5320):

e5320.jpg


New CPU Installed:
newcpu.jpg


newcpu2.jpg


After Server Upgrades:

finished.jpg


--

Current Server Specs as of now:

System: Supermicro SYS-6015B-TV (Black)
Motherboard: Supermicro X7DBR-E
CPU: Dual Intel Xeon "Clovertown" 5320 Quad-Core (8 x 1.86GHz)
RAM: 4 x 2GB Wintec DDR2-667 Fully Buffered DIMM's
Hard Drives: 2 x 74GB Western Digital Raptors 10K RPM, 1 x 120GB Seagate backup drive
OS: Windows Server 2003 Enterprise 32-bit
 
Ph?bus said:
Wow nice. If only those were E5650s. Mmm.
Click to expand...

You mean the X5650? :)

I've had this server for about 3 years now, and the X5650 wasn't available, hehe.

I do need a new server though, with an HPET compatible motherboard and CPU's so I can take advantage of Windows Server 2008's full potential..
 
CrazyKiller said:
You mean the X5650? :)

I've had this server for about 3 years now, and the X5650 wasn't available, hehe.

I do need a new server though, with an HPET compatible motherboard and CPU's so I can take advantage of Windows Server 2008's full potential..
Click to expand...

i'll take the old one when you get a new one ;)
 
Passerby said:
why would you ever run windows on a server
Click to expand...

Actually, it runs great. One of the best servers I've had the privilege to use, and it's incredibly stable for us. I think CrazyKiller has only had to reboot it a handful of times, and it's usually when I screw something up.
 
HWG said:
Actually, it runs great. One of the best servers I've had the privilege to use, and it's incredibly stable for us. I think CrazyKiller has only had to reboot it a handful of times, and it's usually when I screw something up.
Click to expand...

Usually, Dave? Always.

Actually, Windows Server is a very stable and secure platform for hosting.

Don't be fooled by the "linux is more secure" / "linux is better" bandwagon. I worked in the industry and some of our most intensive and critical servers ran Windows. The speed, reliability, and security is top notch and some software and application suites just do not exist on linux, or even if they do they are not up to par with what is needed.

Also, the operating system doesn't make a server good or bad. It's the adminstrators that are responsible. An incompetent administrator can be the biggest security hole on a server.

Edit: In case you are wondering though, I also run 3 CentOS webservers as well so I am not strictly a Windows advocate.
 
Last edited:
CrazyKiller said:
Usually, Dave? Always.

Actually, Windows Server is a very stable and secure platform for hosting.

Don't be fooled by the "linux is more secure" / "linux is better" bandwagon. I worked in the industry and some of our most intensive and critical servers ran Windows. The speed, reliability, and security is top notch and some software and application suites just do not exist on linux, or even if they do they are not up to par with what is needed.

Also, the operating system doesn't make a server good or bad. It's the adminstrators that are responsible. An incompetent administrator can be the biggest security hole on a server.

Edit: In case you are wondering though, I also run 3 CentOS webservers as well so I am not strictly a Windows advocate.
Click to expand...

ya i run suse linux enterprise servers and used to have some red hat and centos ones and never really like dealing with windows for servers but most applications I ran depend on Apache and the community mysql server.

personally i just find unix servers much easier to administer but im sure that is more due to me having most of my experiences with bsd and linux.

and i find that with windows i cant get the up-times I want i still got a SLE10 server that has been going with no reboots for years.

but ya i see your point having a good admin using the tools there familiar with is better than giving them something that they are not familiar with. since the OS and the hardware and really just tools for maintaining the services that are being provided by it.
 
Last edited:
Passerby said:
ya i run suse linux enterprise servers and used to have some red hat and centos ones and never really like dealing with windows for servers but most applications I ran depend on Apache and the community mysql server.

personally i just find unix servers much easier to administer but im sure that is more due to me having most of my experiences with bsd and linux.

and i find that with windows i cant get the up-times I want i still got a SLE10 server that has been going with no reboots for years.
Click to expand...

I never really liked working with Suse, but I did like Ubuntu linux a lot.

My uptime is not really too important to me. The server *knock on wood* never crashes on it's own accord.The last two crashes I had were user related:

I disabled the networking adapter in the middle of the night by accident one time, and then HWG wiped my MySQL server clean the other. That was not a fun 3AM phone call.

Still, on my Windows server I run IIS 6.0, MySQL5-community, Perl, PHP, and FTP. My primary CentOS webserver runs Apache 2.2, MySQL5-community, Perl, PHP, FTP, and SSH. My secondary CentOS webservers run Apache 2.0, MySQL4-community, Perl, PHP, FTP, and SSH as well.

:)
 
CrazyKiller said:
I never really liked working with Suse, but I did like Ubuntu linux a lot.

My uptime is not really too important to me. The server *knock on wood* never crashes on it's own accord.The last two crashes I had were user related:

I disabled the networking adapter in the middle of the night by accident one time, and then HWG wiped my MySQL server clean the other. That was not a fun 3AM phone call.

Still, on my Windows server I run IIS 6.0, MySQL5-community, Perl, PHP, and FTP. My primary CentOS webserver runs Apache 2.2, MySQL5-community, Perl, PHP, FTP, and SSH. My secondary CentOS webservers run Apache 2.0, MySQL4-community, Perl, PHP, FTP, and SSH as well.

:)
Click to expand...

ya different people like different things i like working with suse and cent and redhat and cant stand ubuntu but ubuntu isnt stable anyways so it is has very little server use.

ya i got about the same set-up on the suse box apache 2.2 mysql5 community php, ftp and ssh and just some basic stuff like vim and yast to make admining easier
 
nice setup man - makes my scraped together pile of old spare parts running a server os look like well, a pile of scraped together old spare parts........
 
featherfoot07 said:
nice setup man - makes my scraped together pile of old spare parts running a server os look like well, a pile of scraped together old spare parts........
Click to expand...

Well, if I had pictures of my original dedicated server you would laugh. It really was a "ghetto" representation of a server.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top