Home Forums Discussions General Discussion Server interface question

Dear Fellow AC users...

I would like to pick your collective brain if I might. I am a new AC user (still in the trial period) I have both a wired and wireless network in my office. My plan is to load AC to the server then to each PC necessary. Here's the problem, my server has a Windows 2000 operating system. Although, AC will run on that OS, I desire to upgrade to Windows XP....

My IT guy "doesn't do servers".... the IT guy that put my wired netword together is no longer in the area. And since I am not skilled in the art of PC techno-speak I don't want to buy something $$$$$ if I don't have to. Can an operating system on a server be updated? This is purely a cost question.
If in fact that were possible, would there be potential interface problems with other software.... At present the major use of the server is for my PM program (centricity) but we will be changing to mbpros for billing/pm.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts. I have perused this site alot over the last 2 weeks and learned a great deal.

Your question about whether the operating system can be updated has a simple answer -- yes. Although I am confused about your server set up.
Are you running an actual server with windows 2000 server or do you have a workstation operating as a server running windows 2000 profession? You see there is no Windows XP server, Windows XP is a workstation (client) operating system. The upgrade from the Windows 2000 server is Windows 2003/2008 server.

One thing you need to be careful of in upgrading this computer from Windows 2000 professional or server is the hardware you are currently using. If your hardware is so old that Windows 2000 was the original operating system, save yourself the trouble and purchase a new computer. The overall cost of such a purchase is worth it compared to the trouble of using old equipment with a new OS. However a new computer would require a reinstall of your applications as well.

Applications that run under Windows 2000 almost without exception run under Windows XP. Of course your application requirements will list whether it can support Windows XP. If you have product support with the application they should be able to assist you. I can not imagine where a Win2000 application would not run flawlessly in Windows XP. However if you use the application outside of their listed specs then you support contract will be useless. Of course you can run Windows 2000 in emulation with VMWare but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.

You may be afraid of an experience like moving from WinXP to Vista. That is a completely different issue. The codebase with Vista is distinctly different from XP. The upgrade from Windows XP from Windows 2000 was nowwhere near the trouble the current Vista upgrade process has been.

If I were you I would keep your old computer and use the old PM on that until you switch. Install the new PM and AC on a new computer and pitch the old computer once you make the change.

Geoff

thomgeo

the windows 2000 software is in the pc that functions as the server for the wired network in my office. This is the same operating system that is currently on the desktop pc's in my office as well. I will be acquiring laptops for using AC in the rooms with patients as well as one additional desktop in my own office to use for AC. The new pc and laptop will have windows xp
the older desktop's will have windows 2000. I would prefer to upgrade the software on the "network server" and the older desktop pc's (if cheaper) than buy all new pc's for the desktop stations.... currently 5.

The major program currently being run on the "server" is the PM program that we will be phasing out of..... we have been advised by software support that we can save this PM file and data to an external hard-drive to open up storage space on the server.

I am trying to prevent interface problems down the road between pc's functioning with windows 2000 and windows xp... and not break my limited bank in the process. I do know that pc's need to be upgraded.... and was looking at upgrading the older desktop pcs over the next 8 months.... but not all at once now...
especially with it being the beginning of the year when cash flow is tighter as patients are meeting deductibles.

What, in your opinion would be more cost-efficient?

Jen

If I understand your post correctly you are running a peer to peer network set up. Is your "server" running Windows 2000 professional or Windows 2000 server edition? I want to make sure that your reference to the Windows 2000 on the server and desktop being the same is correct. It is easy to confuse this issue. That is one reason the server OS in windows is named differently now.

Cost effective is a relative issue. Upgrading to XP from 2000 will be easy or difficult (usually easy). The problem you have is that you may need to upgrade hardware which adds to the cost. Also you mentioned that you can off load you PM software files onto an external drive to make room on the server. This lead me to think that your "server" is under powered and a small hard drive. What happens is that you keep having to add and upgrade pieces here and there then you end up spending more than the computer is worth. Remember that your time is probably more valuable that money. You can easily get bogged down with a lot of extra time trying to upgrade your equipment.

Does you server meet the hardware requirements for AC?

Geoff

Geoff,

From what AC tech support tells me, my current server can run the program. Just concerned that this server.... which is 6 years old now might not handle the patient data as we begin the data entry. At some point, the "serer" will not have enough memory for he data input for AC.... then what would be the options? I have a busy practice not a starat up.... so I want to make certain there is not going to be a memory issue problem in the very near future.... and since we have to add/interface additional hardware, this seems the most appropriate time to do it?

Perhaps this is all a non-issue....I just don't want to end up with an operating system that is at end of life... so to speak... in a year or two....and have to upgrade then....

Jen

If you are concerned about the memory issue then you should pitch the server and buy new. The cost of upgrading is probably not worth the expense. Adding a new hard drive and/or memory is trivial if you can do this work but if you need an IT person to do it the cost would be the same as purchasing a new computer.

How much memory do you have in the server? Are you referring to RAM or hard drive space? Is the current server "slow" and not working optimally now?

You can migrate the server software to a new computer if needed.

It would be helpful to know exactly what the actual OS is on the server.

Geoff

Geoff,

AFteryour queries I reviewed all the updating we have done to the server. We did update the server progam to Windows 2003 small business version. The server is very slow....

Even if I purchase a new server.... the "old PM" program will not be input onto the server but stored on an external hard-drive. WE will not need the data in 18 months.... (and already have external hard-drive)

Since I'm not literate in all computer lingo... RAM is memory and hard drive is storage space... am I correct in this if not please correct.


Jen

Yes, you are correct. RAM is faster than your Hard Disks storage so programs are loaded from your HD to RAM. You maybe have 2 GB ram and 160 GB hard disk space.

I don't know SBS 2003, does anyone know the utility that tells you all of your specs? At any rate in XP you can learn how much ram you have and what cpu you have by right clicking on 'my computer' and selecting properties. May be the same on SBS.

Jen,

Geoff and Ben are completely correct. I hate to throw a monkey wrench into all this, but it is hard to follow your posts. It sounds like you have a "pseudoserver" (I use that term to delineate between an "actual" server which runs Server software such as Windows Server 2003 or 2008 or SBS and a computer in a P2P that users use for running apps such as AC or billing software.

In one of your posts, you talk about having Windows 2000 on a regular PC that you are using as a pseudoserver. First, while you can use XP to access 2000, I wouldn't. It is much easier network-wise to use XP Pro as your "server" software. Make sure you use all XP Pro.

Then what SCARES me is your comment that you threw SBS 2003 on that computer. While SBS 2003 can run on any computer, I doubt the computer has the specs to run it efficiently, hence the slowness. Running SBS 2003 on a plain workstaion is kind of like putting a 350 HP engine on a bicycle.

In order to network properly, one has to decide what am I trying to accomplish. Am I looking for a really top notch client/server set up with SBS 2003 (excellent choice) on a "real" server with all XP Pro clients or Vista Business? Or, am I going to run P2P, which is fine (and can be run on a "real" server, but could easily be run on a workstation that has a good hardware setup (at least 1GB of RAM and a decent processor).

There should be no issues with adding data to AC. If AC works well on day one on the database, then it should be fine on day 300.

I am also confused as to not putting your old billing data on the server. I may be missing something, but everything should be on the server and not on external drives. (except for backups).

You mentioned earlier that your IT guy doesn't do servers. THEN HE ISN'T AN IT GUY. He is someone who knows a lot about computers. You can't set up a network which, by definition, is a group of computers who can all access files and applications from a single server be it P2P or client/server on a domain. To set up a network properly, the IT person needs to know how to set up the server.

When I read a thread like this, I try to determine if the author of the thread simply needs some direction or more help. Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you purchased SBS 2003, you will need some help installing it on a server.

Spend the money on the right equipment, get a server or pseudoserver that can run everything and DEFINITELY get an IT person to help. And with SBS, I would get a real server. You can get a good HP one for $1500 or so. I know that is a bit of money, but you will need it to run SBS correctly.

A word about IT people. Here is an analogy. Saying an IT person is like saying a doctor. By saying doctor are you talking about somene who just graduated medical school? Or someone who is completely licensed and board-certified in something. If my patient has JRA, I send them to a pediatric rheumatologist. If I need help with my network, I hire someone who is CERTIFIED to do this. Such as a Microsoft Small Business Certified IT person.

Again, as in other posts, sit down and design your network. Determine what you want such as P2P or client/server. Are you going to use Active Director in a domain setup, which you should if you use SBS 2003 or not? Once you decide what you want, then learn how to do it or hire someone who does.

Jen,

You have a big problem with your computer set up in the office. It sounds like you have a mixed environment of different products, installs of software, etc. Like Bert said you need to sit down and figure out what you want to do with your office network. You are better off to set up a client-server set up rather than a peer to peer. I would also recommend you seek professional IT help or spend a lot of time learning IT stuff.

If you have the SBS 2003 software your easily transfer that software and license to another computer. You can purchase an inexpensive server from Dell or HP without the OS and just install it.

You can attach Windows 2000 clients to the SBS 2003. It may be a little more work but can be done.

Good Luck,

Geoff

Bert and Geoff,

I do have a true server that had software updated to Windows 2003 small business version. All of the addional software (billing/) is installed here as well and used within the network pc's

My plan is to have a true network setup where AC is on the SERVER an copies to each of the work stations needed within the office. The office network also includes a wireless portion to allow for the point of care interactions with patients in the exam rooms.

My questions are.... (and maybe more for my intellectual stimulation) The new hardware being purchased for the additional user stations will have Windows XP and not Windows 2003.... will this create a problem running the network smoothly?
Second, at some point Windows 2003 will fade away... no longer be optimally supported, or have difficulty interfacing with other software I might like to run on the system.... so Ithought it might be best to just upgrade the server now before I install AC on it.... However, Bert, I am willing to bite the bullet and purchase a new server to circumvent the problem.

As for the old PM/Billing Data, that currently resides on the sever, My original thought was to merely upgrade the current server, and store the data ther with a backup to the external hardrive. Eventually, we will be phasing out of that PM program.
However, as you know, it takes awhile to capture all of the reveuneu from the previous calendar year, with secondaries etc.
I will need to maintain a copy of the data for at least a couple of years then can delete it....

I have realized that I do need a person who knows IT inside and out..... and is certified.... I have hired such a person to oversee this networking issue.

It sounds as if I might have created Pandora's box.....egads....

Thanks for the help

Jen

You can find a great reference to this topic at:
http://www.connectionstrings.com/sql-server-2005

Again because AC4's database is SQL Server, you should not, repeat should not, have to INSTALL THE APPLICATION on the server. The database should be installed on your Windows server, and each client machine would simply point it's connection string to the server.

If AC4 is using ODBC you would have to modify the ODBC connection, on each client, to point to the server.

If it is using ADO.Net you would have to modify the connection string in the App.config file.

Note: the INSTALLATION program should ASK YOU for the server information and create this connection string automatically.

In a Client-Server environment, the SOFTWARE is on the Client Machines and the Database is on the Server.

Jen,

You have a basic misunderstanding of the issue at hand. First of all your server software is distinctly different from the client software that you run on the regular computers you use. The server acts as a central repository for storing data, running applications, email, managing user accounts and access, etc.

Windows SBS (Small Business server) 2003 is a special server OS that includes a multitude of applications including the Windows 2003 server, Exchange 2003, Sharepoint and many wizards and management applications for the server that improve the function and ease of use. You do not have to run of the added applications in SBS. (I would point out that the premium version of the SBS 2003 has a SQL server which you would NOT need to run the AC application.)

The currently supported Windows server OSes are Windows 2003 r2 and Windows 2008. Windows 2003 server will be around for a while, people are not going out in droves to upgrade to 2008. Now these are the server OSes.

The Windows Servers operate a service known as the Active Directory (AD). The Active Directory is an authentication system that allows clients to interface with the server and share resources. In the AD a user is created and that allows you to restrict and authorize resources. For example you may want to restrict access to your billing software or accounting folders. AD makes this "relatively" easy. That is the power of using a client-server set up - controlling and regulating access to computer resources. In a peer to peer set up you would have to set up the users, shared folder permissions, printer, etc on each computer instead of just the server. This make proper management of the network impossible in all but the smallest set ups. (There is considerable debate in the user community about the need to use client-server network to properly secure and use a medical office's IT resources. Many will argue that peer to peer is adequate and that using a server software is a waste of money.)

Now the clients that can log into the AD are Windows 2000 professional, Windows XP Profession (not Home) and Windows Vista Business, Enterprise, Ultimate (but not Home edition) are the OSes that can interface and log in to the Windows Server AD. Using these client OSes you can "attach" to the server, log in as a user and have the shared folders, printer, email, AC, etc accessible.

And so in answer to the original question of the thread what do I do with my office set up?

I would keep the Windows Server 2003 (but you my need to upgrade to SBS 2003 release 2 which you would have to pay for). From there you can either keep your Windows 2000 OS on the client machines (desktop) that can interface with the server. Alternatively you can upgrade them to Windows XP but that is not necessary. However a mixed client OS environment with Windows 2000, XP and/or Vista will create some headaches (but not insurmountable)

I am not sure why you feel that you have to keep the PM information and programs on a removable drive. Why not just place it on the server and access it from a shared folder?

Geoff

Here are some links that may help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2003#Windows_Small_Business_Server

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP

Jen,

Geoff has summed it up PERFECTLY. To add a couple of points, a true server usually runs server OS software. You have to understand that a real server has distinct advantages over non-server hardware, the ability to run a RAID controller for one. It also has redundancy of its own and has much faster throughput.

A server runs OS software that Geoff mentioned above. Clients run client software such as 2000, XP and Vista. You state that you aren't sure if XP will run with 2003, etc. XP Pro is MADE to run with server OSs. That is the whole idea. The others are too.

As Geoff says, do not worry about Microsoft support, etc. 2003 will be here for awhile. And, neither Geoff nor I understand the need to put the billing software (even if it is old) on external hardware. External drives are ususally for backups or you can use NAS for extra functionality.

Personally, I would get rid of everything on the clients and install either XP Pro or Vista Business. Enterprise and Ultimate are more than you need. Ultimate just gives you extra medial stuff you don't want your staff using.

I don't want to leave you with the impression that you have to have a certified IT person. I am not certified, Geoff is not either and either of us could set you up.

But, and again don't take this personally, given your questions, it is clear you need someone who knows networking AT your site. If you wish to use Exchange Server (comes with SBS) or extra on just 2003, you will need IT. To set up Active Directory and permissions, you will need IT. This doesn't even mention your Internet connection, firewall, switch, etc.

Again, as Geoff states, EVERY SINGLE THING that needs to be accessed by all NEEDS to be or SHOULD be on the server whether it's a pseudoserver or peer-to-peer. But, the advantages of Active Director are numerous.

One thing that always gets lost in the shuffle on here and I think Geoff would agree is that everyone talks about P2P vs Server/Client DOMAIN in relation to AC only. A true office is looking at many things other than AC that will have extra functionality using Active Directory.

Finally, the functions that AD allows you to do, such as permissions, etc. and also Group Policy are extremely powerful attributes of a domain. Users on here constantly talk about remoting in. Many answers are given. LogMeIn, GoToPC, Remote Desktop, but with Remote Web Workplace (with SBS only), you get the safest login that every user can use. Even that can be restricted via the server.

I would not try to set up your network with the help of a few of us on here. You really need someone there in front of you who understands your needs and can give you sound advice. Once you trust them, let them do their job and you can take care of the patients. Of course, watch what he or she is doing. Preferable this person would be available when you need him/her and could remote in when necessary to the server to fix small problems.

Geoff's answer rocked! OK, Geoff you owe me a six pack or something after all those praises.

Oh, by the way, Geoff. Correct me if I am wrong. But, I beleive HP or Dell will set up your RAID and install the OS for you. You would still have to run the wizards to set up your users, etc.

I have put this on here before, but if you at least want to get an understanding of SBS 2003 or Windows Server 2003 or just about any OS or AC or whatever, get the TrainSignal DVDs. They are awesome. Much better than reading a book. I still use them when I set up an OS.

Bert and Geoff,

Thank you very much for your advice and input. I WON'T be quitting my day job any time soon and starting a career in IT.... NOT had too many horror stories of Fortran....

Anyway, you did answer many questions....

Take home points
1. I really don't need to upgrade the server except to the latest version of 2003 SBS.

2. The desktop pc's will in general do ok with the software
3. Make certain whoever puts the rest of the network hardware in place, needs to understand the needs of the network.
4. A REAL IT person should be able to handle server issues/upgrades and questions/problems....

I guess I owe the two you a six-pack a piece.....

Jen

Jen,

I would agree with all points. And, feel free to ask questions any time. I think it will be easier for you and those of us who try to help if you have one or two questions at a time.

I am glad we could help.

Jen,

We are happy to help, good luck with your set up.

In answer to Bert question about the ability to set up your server with HP or Dell, they will do what ever you pay them to do whether RAID and other such options that can be selected during check out. However they will not take your existing server license and migrate that to a new server. You may be able to get a local computer hack to perform the install on a new server that you either have them build or purchased from whomever without an installed OS. Do not buy a desktop at Walmart, BestBuy, etc and use that to install your server. USE SERVERS. I tried an install of SBS 2003 on a desktop Intel mainboard that I built. I had lots of problems with that set up, especially the drivers. Dedicated server components work better, safer and easier to maintain. But do not get carried away with expensive dual socket Xeons and SAS/SCSI drives.

If you monitor blogs like techbargains.com you will find from time to time discounted Dell server deals in the $300-400 range without an installed OS. You have to be careful with Dell but they usually work as planed. I built my own at home, the server already existed where I work (a Dell).

One thing that I should mention is that the AC program lists XP as the recommended OS to use the application. They may not be able to provide support to a Windows 2000 OS. You should ask tech support or maybe someone else can answer that question. I can not imagine why 2000 would not work in the current verison v3.7. That may become an issue in using v4 of AC especially with the SQL server and .Net 2.0 framework.

I quickly reviewed the application specs on the AC website before writing the above paragraph. I can understand your confusion.

Geoff

Bert,

thanks for the complement your posts certainly helped to clarify the issue better.

I liked your statement about using the remote web workplace for the remote access. You are absolutely right. At the user conference I thought to myself how much a domain server setup would have improved the usability of the AC application and overall IT set up of users that were having networking and security concerns.

Geoff

"You are absolutely right"

Geeze, now he is not just right, he is absolutely right!

Leslie

@ Leslie, Of course, I am right, lol.

@ Geoff, I am so enamored by SBS 2003, I almost want to visit every user and set it up for them. Sharepoint is the most amazing thing ever.

Geoff,

Not sure if I should mention this here, but it is true so may as well. XP was the first to have activation so you could only install one per desktop or two if you have a laptop.

Looking at 2000, well....you can read between the lines.

Jen,

Another thing. If you get an HP or Dell -- can't go wrong either way -- MAKE SURE you get a warranty. Best to get the three year five days a week next day service. Obviously, four hours on site service is best but costly and only needed for super critical servers.

They both have incredible support especially with these contracts. Although, the warranty specifically applies to the server, they will let you know if they think it is purely an OS software issue. My guess is they would help either way. It would be well worth the investment.

Also, there is a website I couldn't live without. It's called Experts-Exchange. You can get a six-day trial -- make sure you have a question in mind. I pay $9.95 a month, but I ask like 100 questions a year. There will thousands of experts who can help you and will stay with you until the question is answered.

Geoff and Bert,

Straight from the lips of the "server-guy" not surfer guy....
We will add another server to work in tandem to what I already have currently. The new server will have Windows SBS 2003 on it.
The current desktop pc's will not have any trouble. Should not create interface problems.

Will use external hard drive as a means to backup data and remove offsite... (weekly----both PM and AC) instead of the current tape system..... The tapes are about $100/per and I have to rotate them.... so it will cost me $1000 to $1500 to upgrade those guys..... When I no longer need the PM prgram and data...
store to external hard-drive and remove from server....

That's the plan....


Thanks for the comments. Bert, I'll check out the website you suggested.... but as you can probably tell, I am not a technophile..... just a newbie....

Jen

I'm not sure I like the "adding another server." This means there is one more server to manage, and more licenses to purchase. I would just as soon buy a server that is powerful enough to cover all my needs.

Hopefully, Jen was talking about adding a server "in place of" the other. We'll see.

Jen, now we are getting into backups. I don't want to second guess your IT guy, but I would NOT take the external backup home. I would have at least two backups at your office that STAY at your office, and a small external hard drive (you can still get a small one that is over 250GBs) to take back and forth. And, you can do it weekly or as much as you like. But, you don't want a server crash and then wonder if the ONE drive is working and WHERE is the other drive. "Wait, I think I left it in my car. No, it's at my house. Wait.." You need off site, but you need on site as well.

Bert,

So, in your opinion how many backups are needed and why? I had originally thought about having an onsite backup to an external hard drive that would rotate out of the office every 7 days (actually 2) one wouldbe in the office, the other at my home.
Additionally, we would do an offsite backup...

My IT guy talked with the folks at AC and the plan listed above is what he came up with.... I will ask him why two servers?

I will be pulling my hair out enough in the next couple of weeks as we go live with AC.... I can hardly wait....
It'snot just a job, it's an IT adventure.....

Jen

First, I like the idea of taking home a backup every seven days. The more the better. I would have a separate hard drive for that. A smaller one (but not a thumb drive). Don't use one that is for in office stuff.

Second, why more than two? Ok, you are using one. The hard drive crashes. Mine did, it happens. Now, you stare at your one hard drive, knowing your take home (which is for disasters -- floods, fire, someone stealing your server) was done six days ago. You really want a fresh backup. So, again, staring, hoping, praying that the drive you are looking at has a "good" copy of your data. Not corrupt. The hard drive is good. Remember, the single most likely piece of equpment to go is a hard drive. By far. So, now maybe you have a 1 in 100 change that the drive is bad or your data is bad. Not good odds with mission critical data.

So, have one for home. Have at LEAST TWO for the office. Adam and I have five. I actually have seven (don't ask). If you do two, then you have to set it up so that every other day, your backup backs up to each drive, so Monday 1, Tuesday 2, Wednesday 1, Thursday 2, etc. We use five simply because there are five days of the week.

Remember, the reason for using backups is probably 10% hard drive crash and 90% data loss. You know where you suddenly realize that a file is missing from a month ago. My backup is such that I have backups on each of the five drives, four deep. This gives me 1 month of pure data. Then I back up everything on a separate network drive monthly. There are a million ways to do it. Just give yourself a lot of redundancy. External drives are cheap. Don't do a bunch of backups like everyday on one drive.

After two months, I checked my backups. Guess what? I had forgotten to check off the D drive. One month of not backing up my data! So, look at your backups once a week. And, do your offsite backup manually.

Also, do a nightly manual backup of your billing and Amazing Charts folders. I can write you a script. Takes ten seconds. If you use SBS 2003, the native ntBackup is not that good for scheduling or documentation. Get Backup Assist. It is extraordinary good. Extraordinary.

Remember set it and forget it is great. But, if all you do is set it and forget it, then remember this mantra: Set it and forget and live to regret it.

People may not agree and think this is overkill. People may use the grandfather method (which Backup Assist does for you if you wish), but this method is tried and true and guarantees you thtat the chance of your server and all five backup drives go bad at the same time is 1:2,400,578,000.

Human error is much more likely like skipping the D: drives.

Now as to the servers. Why you would need more than one server is beyond me. Get your IT person to write down the reason and put it on here. Makes no sense. If you need an application server, a web server, and a file server, fine. If you are IBM, then go with it. Any large company will use nodes, etc. But, you AREN'T a large company.

As to the Go Live Date, it is exciting. Don't get too stressed. I downloaded AC on Friday and we went live on Monday. Not a testament to me but to Dr. Bertman and his easy product.

Thanks.

Bert,

I asked my IT guy that same question.....The current server has about 30% remaining data storage capacity. Apparently he spoke with tech support at AC, and given that I will need or eventually exceed the storage capacity on the current server thinks it is better to upgrade to a new server and load AC on there. The Old server houses the PM proram, billing data that will be eventually phased out, but I will still need to access it for rebilling and the like.

I uderstand your concern about redundant backup.... indulge me a bit.... I'm half Polish, and want to make certain I got the take home points.

For the backups at the office.... external hard drive, not a thumb drive (is that the same as flash drive?), daily would be better, consider using a backup program that will automate the process, archive the backup files in an organized fashion.... ie. group by month for addtional redundancy..

Question, Do you keep the copies of your backups forever?
If so why? Or, do you eventually delete the oldest.... say at 6 months etc.

Jen

I would replace the server ONLY if by upgrading you would improve overall performance. If you upgrade to a new server, you would need to either copy all your data or clone the data, so you may as well add larger hard drives. Some RAIDs allow you to extend the RAID. Your situation is a great reason to have two RAIDs, a RAID1 for OS and a RAID5 for data. Then you can make the data drive larger quite easily. Even if you didn't use RAID, which would not be suggested, you could have two drives and EASILY copy the data from a small data drive to a very large data drive.

You left out one key peice information. 30% of 300GBs leaves you with 100GBs of space. 30% of 36GBs leaves you with 12GBs. Big difference.

However, here is the reality. Your PM program and billing data program which will be phased out do not sound as if they will get bigger. So, from what you are saying, the only thing getting bigger is your AC. Now forgetting the Imported Items, it would take years for a solo practice to take up even 1GB of space on a drive. Imported Items would grow as a more steady pace. Even so, we import probably 50 faxes a day and, after a year, only have 4GBs of data. So, space doesn't sound like an issue.

Bottom line. If you are only upgrading for more space OR if your IT person is saying, "Hey, we have to copy that data and redo the server anyway, may as well get a better server," then fine. Otherwise, copy your OS and data a few times -- many programs will allow you to image or clone your data, then add hard drives to your server or your RAID and copy back.

As to the backups, EVERYONE does it differently. If you have fifty people, then fifty people will do it differently. However, if you have 50 users, my guess is at least 40 won't back up adequately.

As to the backups in the office, you need at least two hard drives preferably more. You wouldn't use flash drives/thumb drives in the office. Think of tapes. You don't back up to a taper over and over. You back up to a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, etc. and then take home Friday and alternate, etc. So, why would one do multiple backups to the SAME drive? For your take home, a flash drive is fine; it is just so small as far as losing it. Works just as well.

I back up only my data once a month to an external drive and keep twelve backups for each month and then start over. One year seems sufficient, but you can do more.

Automated backups are the way to go. The weekly backup that you take home is manual so that is good. I also do separate backups of just the AC and billing folder daily. I use a script for that. I call that a modular backup. So, if something happens to my data, I have a quick backup ready. I just like to have automated AND a quick manual backup.

FYI: If you are using 2003, you will have VSS (Volume Shadow Copy). This automatically backs up certain shared folders as often as you like. This accomplishes two things: First, it insures that your backup will backup files that are in use. And, second, it gives you multiple backups of allowable folders. This is nice because it runs in the background as often as you wish.

I still do not subscribe to the notion that you "need" two servers. If you are upgrading your server, it would be wiser to have ALL your data on the NEWER MACHINE.

Bert is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT when he talks about the hard drive configuration. In my server configuration I have:
1) 2 mirrored (RAID 0) 160gb Hard Drives. These drives are only for my OS and Applications NO DATA.
2) 4 750GB Hard Drives (RAID 5). This is for DATA ONLY all of the DATA THAT NEEDS TO BE STORED IS STORED HERE. Now the way RAID 5 Works 2 of the Drives are used for actually storing the data. One is for Parity, and the fourth is the Hot Spare.

My RAID subsystem is on an entirely different RAID Controller from the MotherBoard.

Another reason I would stay away from Multiple Servers, is Multiple Licenses (Server OS, Backup, AV).

If your OLD SERVER as a RAID, you can probably use it as your backup machine INSTEAD of a NAS.

Jen,

I can see why the IT person may have recommended that you keep the server.

You can not use two SBS 2003 servers in the same domain, the SBS server must be the root domain and the primary domain controller. You can only add a regular Win2003 server to a SBS 2003 domain. If you're just going to keep the old server "in the corner" and just use it off the network to access the old records that may not be such a bad idea. Perhaps the transition to a new server is more trouble than it is worth.

A flash drive and a thumb drive are the same.

I agree with the above posts but I am not sure that a small office server installation would need a RAID 0 (edit-I meant RAID 1 not RAID 0) plus RAID 5 set up. Although this is a good set up if you can set it up.

How long you need to keep the back up is up to considerable debate.
There are two types of back up. First the back up to keep your OS, AC, etc programs up and running. Maintaining a back up of the OS install to keep the server and computers running. Data backup to restore should the hard drive or hardware fail. Basically to keep your network and software running.
The other type of back up is a "data" back up. This consists of daily, weekly and monthly back ups. Maintaining "snapshots" on a monthly basis of your database helps to protect against data corruption. If something happens to corrupt the database but you do not realize it for several weeks/months you would have a real problem if you could not go back to known working database. Hopefully such a thing would not happen but it is better to be safe.

There is no perfect answer to amount of back ups to perform or how long you want to keep the back up on hand. It is a mater of how much risk you want to take and how much you want to spend. Although you should at least maintain daily backups of your AC and snapshot back ups monthly. And DO NOT make the process difficult, a back up plan that is not usable is just as bad as no back up plan.

Geoff

PS

When are we going to get around to posting these ideas on the Wiki page instead of the forum, back solutions, server set ups, etc.

I think you just did, lol.

As to the Wikis, I will never use them. While I don't mind and, in fact, enjoy posting on here and helping when possible, I don't have time to do editing, etc. with wikis. When you think about it, I don't think "How To Do Something" lends itself well to wikis. I don't see too many "How to do this and how to do that" in Wikipedia.

I would have to disagree that a small office does not necessarily need RAID. If one is going to invest in the advantages of Client/Server, then one may as well benefit from the advantages of RAID. Large companies have many servers and full time IT personnel to manage them. Their data in critical. Small businesses such as most of us on here have only one of the staff to manage one server. (maybe they have an IT person they hire part time or as needed). But, the data is just as important if not more so. Your patient records and your billing records are mission critical. Having the redundancy of a RAID setup is a great benefit.

Not to get into the topic of RAID levels but RAID0 is probably not a good choice. It does offer the best performance, but it technically is not RAID, it is AID. The most common RAIDS used are RAID 1, 5 and 10. Everyone likes his or her own, but I use RAID1 for OS and RAID5 for data. I, like George, also have a Hot Spare, which is invaluable for keeping your server running without a hiccup if one drive is lost.

The irony of RAID is that for someone not acquainted with RAID will have some difficulty understanding it. But, configuring RAID is rather easy. If you have a RAID controller and enough drives, you can configure the RAID in the RAID setup in BIOS or most servers will have a pre-windows environment disk that will walk you through it.

I certainly can't see purchasing a server and a server OS and not using RAID.

Sorry about the misspeak on the RAID and backup, I need to work on my typing after a long day. (really no excuse since the 1 and 0 are on opposite sides)

Using a RAID 0 on a server is total insanity.

Anyways I think that RAIDing a server is a great idea. Using a simple RAID 1 and a good back up plan should be sufficient. Adding an additional RAID 5 for data (additional 3-4 drives and controller) I think may be a little over the top. But that is my opinion.

RAIDs are not difficult to manage and pretty effective.

Geoff

I need to clarify my vision of back up. I see back up in two forms:

1st - back ups of the server to maintain the function of the server and network. Regular daily back ups and hardware failure solutions like RAID to maintain the server running. You need to keep imagining back ups using Norton Ghost. I am not sure about using the SBS server back up software. You need backup plans, equipment, etc to keep the server in operation. Some people will even use two servers in tandom to fail over if needed.

2nd - back of the data integrity. That would be snap shots of the AC or MS shadow copy feature. Just keeping an up to date back up is not sufficient, you need snap shots of different states in you DB. If you end up with data corruption but you did not realize it for several weeks/months without those snap shots your screwed. You will need to keep those snap shots safe and for a while. AC tech staff said that you should keep it for 18 months (this is hearsay from my IT). You can decide what you want to do. Obviously the size of the AC is relatively small and easy to back up.

Remember that RAID is NOT a backup solution, it is a hardware failure solution. It only protects against failure of the hard drive NOT the data (ie virus, corruption, failed updates, etc.).

If I was an actual IT professional I may be able to add the proper terminology to the above discription.

Geoff

Thomgeo1, I prefer to have my OS and may data on 2 entirely different subsystems. This gives me the option of moving my Data Raid Subsystem to another machine easily if I have to.

I mirror the OS/Application drives for speed and redundancy; the data drives which hold ALL of my data, including USER My Documents, and all the practice data, images/scans, database etc, are on a raid five.

My entire raid5 subsystem is backed up incrementally to a Promise NAS N4300 (also RAID5). The OS drive (RAID 0) is IMAGED weekly. The Data backups are stored online. The images are bootable images on DVD.

Geoff,

Now, you are all over it. I knew you were there, lol. No offense to George, I can't imagine a RAID0 unless you are combining for a RAID10.

RAID1 and RAID5 is a bit over the top. Ironically, I now have RAID5 and some would go with RAID1. RAID1 has a bit more redundancy and less efficiency but RAID5 is faster with less redundancy. My new system is RAID1 and RAID5. I don't think you can go wrong with either. But, RAID0, yuk, unless you are as thorough as George with his imaging.

@ Jen -- completely disregard this RAID talk. It is probably a bit over your head right now. But, it is good to get. So talk to your IT guy. And, as you can see, three people will give you five answers, lol.

@ Geoff -- glad to see I wasn't reading it wrong. You're the best.

My reason for my setup is very simple:
I favor SPEED over redundancy on my OS/Application drives. There is nothing, repeat nothing, on my OS/App drive that cannot be reinstalled in a matter of a couple of hours if those drives were lost/corrupt. They can be restored from an image in under 1 hour.

My data is invaluable and cannot be replaced. Even further, would require significant down time to restore; thus, RAID5. The RAID5 has a hot spare, and is hot-swap capable.

This is just my opinion. I agree with the RAID5.

I suppose there would have to be a good deal of testing, because I don't think a RAID0 will give you THAT much more performance speed-wise than a RAID1. Sure, write speeds are slower but read speeds are still fast. And, I don't think it would be that noticeable. Just my opinion.

Raid 0 on a decent controller would smoke a RAID 1 set up since you can effectively double the bandwidth of the RAID drive set up in a RAID 0 (although it probably is around 60% more bandwidth, guessing).

RAID 5 is essentially a RAID 0 with a parity stripe that allows for reconstruction of the RAID array if one drive fails. If you only use the minimum of 3 drives for the RAID 5 then you have to take the RAID off line to rebuild. Adding the 4th drive to the RAID 5 (which is actually creates a RAID 6 setup since you are stripping two parity drives which is what gkfahnbulleh describes) allows for continuous performance of the RAID set up while one drive is being reconstructed. You probably should take the array off line to rebuild though.

It terms of performance RAID 0>RAID 5>RAID 6>>RAID 1, your mileage will vary depending on the quality of the hard drive and the controller you use. You can quickly spend money on this type of set up.

RAID 0 is never a good idea for important data or an OS but is great for high performance gaming systems. However if you read performance reviews (which I do not have links to) the performance of a good RAID 5 set up can come within 10-15% of a RAID 0 with better protection against hard drive failures.

Geoff