Home Forums Discussions General Discussion "Main"/Server Specifications Poll

What are the specifications of your "MAIN" computer a.k.a. server?

We have a mirrored system with two Dell Poweredge T-100's both with APC SX 900 Battery Backups.

Although I would have rather had MS Server 2008, the IT guys were familiar with MS 2003 (Std, with SP 2), so that's what we got, since I know (knew) nothing about administering a network.

From the "properties" info:

Intel (R) Xeon (R) CPU
E3110 @ 3.00 GHz
3.00 GHz 3.99 GB RAM

Physical Address Extension

Without a doubt, you can set yourself up for less money than we did, but we were just starting our private practice and wanted the technology to almost disappear because it worked so well.

And btw, one of the best (BEST) things about Amazing Charts is that it did not require a change to the way my husband practiced medicine (something he's very, very good at) in order to document (a necessary evil) with the computer (something he is not so comfortable with).

Most EMRs come between the doctor and the patient, imho. Rather than supporting the doctor's documentation and lessening the possibility of error (automatic drug interaction checking, for example); the average EMR requires too much adaptation on the part of the medical staff.

I hope this helps!

When we started using AC, we used it only as a scheduler. We actually used a refurb $300 computer with win xp home edition. When we started using it to bill, we then "upgraded" to a little more expensive $400 win xp pro machine. But we did regular daily back-up.

Since we started using the EHR function, we now have an inexpensive Windows 7 Pro machine, with RAID1 mirrored drive (for what its worth), 500GB dual mirrored hard drive, at a cost of $599. We do back up twice a day, morning and night. Currently AC online automated back up is not working!! They claim that it will be fixed with version 6. They claim that if you change the time for the back up, it will work (it will not, you'll have to reboot the computer before it will "automate" backup. So we manually back it up daily to an external fireproof hard drive (1.5 TB, about $250). And manually back it up online to AC.

So far, every thing is working fine. The limitting factor is the terminals, and not the "server". We have about 6 terminals hooked up to it, a mix of Win 7 premium home, win 7 pro, vista, and xp pro.

I have to say I don't know when you set this up and I figure you have the right to yell at me and throw things at me if you want, but I just have to give my opinion as usual. Why would your "IT" guys install an OS from 2003 when it's 2011. SBS 2011 is already out. If they are truly IT guys, then they ought to be able to up to speed if they want to compete with the other IT guys. It's like having a car salesman telling you to get the 2003 model, because the mechanics are better acquainted with that model. That's why they send their mechanics back to school.

If you do upgrade, consider Small Business Server. It truly is a better OS for a small business and more economical. And, it is out in 2011.

Sorry, just couldn't resist.

What's your server like? Do you have SBS 2011 or 2008?

I had SBS2008 before 2011 came out. But, as usual, it is an awesome server. But, I guess I would look at 2011 before looking at 2008. But, definitely get Small Business Server and not the standard servers which can be used in a two-person environment, but were meant for large companies that need multiple domains and sub-domains, etc.

SBS 2011 looks pretty solid. Just built one for the office a couple of days ago.
Specs:
CPU: Intel LGA 1155 Xeon E3-1235 3.2 GHz
HDD: 4X Western Digital RE4 500GB in RAID 10
RAID Card: 3ware 9650SE-4LPML RAID Card
PSU: Silverstone ST500GF 500W 80 Plus Silver Redundant
Mobo: SUPERMICRO MBD-X9SCA-F-O LGA 1155
RAM: Crucial 16GB (4 x 4GB) ECC Unbuffered DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600)
Case: Ark SR-801BB E-ATX
GPU: Matrox G200ew Integrated
Optical Drive: Asus DVDRW
OS: Windows Small Business Server 2011 Standard

OK, now I am drooling. And, I'm glad to see RAID 10 hasn't fallen off the face of the earth. Good amount of RAM as well. I added 4 times 4, but had the 4 times 1, so I have 20 now. Pretty much overkill. When I upgrade to SQL 2008, I can use some more of it.

I almost bought the server from Dell but they were charging around 7100+ before tax and shipping. I got this one at less than half the price.

Also, about the RAID 10, I liked it a lot more than the RAID 1 idea that many people were saying to get. Like the 146 GB 15K HDD in RAID 1. We're eating through hard drive space and I don't think 146 GB would suffice, especially since the recommended space for SBS 2011 is 120GB. So I opted for the 500 GB X 4 (1 Tb usable) in RAID 10. Setup partitions as follows 120 GB SBS 2011, 200 GB Exchange (planning to use encrypted email), 200 GB Amazing Charts and other Apps, 410 GB User Data.

Wow. My Dell 2900 was only around $3500. Your components must be more costly, although I do have seven drives and two RAID cards. You have to let me know how the 2011 works.

You do know that 2008 and 2011 both have the fastest and most secure remote logons ever. RDP now uses 443 and no longer uses 3389. Just a couple of settings.

It's pretty cool because you can also get to any computer in your network. You don't have to port forward from 3389 to 3390, etc. Just enter the FQDN of the computer and you log right in. It's cool, too, because instead of just watching it connect, it will actually say, "configuring connection, then securing connection."

I have a Windows Server 2008 Std, lying around. I keep thinking about setting up a Terminal Server, but I am the only one who logs in remotely so it doesn't really make much sense.

I guess I have never really understood why someone doesn't go with SBS. It's likely because they have never heard of it. Someone told me, or I wouldn't have known I suppose.

Dell doesn't have the new SandyBridge CPUs which are substantially faster than their quad core Xeon 3XXX and 5XXX competitors. As you can see, the Intel Xeon X5675 approximately, $1500, has a slight performance boost over the Intel I7-2600K. (http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html) The Xeon E3 line is basically the same thing as the i7-2600K. Here's the kicker, the Xeon E3-1270 is about $340. So to get an equivalent system from dell I have to spend substantially more. Also, they don't have a 16GB RAM option, I have to spend ~1000 for 24GBs of RAM, where as I spent 250. Of course I can buy 6GB and upgrade it manually. But then there goes 6 1GB sticks as soon as I want to upgrade. (Based off the T710.) Using an integrated controller for RAID 10 is horrible idea. One should always use an external RAID card for RAID 5 and above.

Just signed up at GoDaddy for the domain name and SSL certificate and I also intend to use Exchange for email. Outlook web access looks promising as well.

Definitely. And, Sharepoint is unbelievable once you start using it. We use Exchange and Droid is connected to Exchange. It automatically finds the cert. I did forget to mention that you would need a public cert for RDP, but I figured you would know that. Much better to log in with a browser with remote.domain_name.com than to have to use an IP address.

Remote Web Workplace still has more options and is the most secure. Of course, it takes a few clicks though. But, it uses port 443 while Sharepoint which used to use 4125, now, in Microsoft's infinite wisdom, is now 987.

But, those are the big three: RWW, Sharepoint and Exchange all licensed with SBS. And, now, bundling RDP through terminal services into 443. This is what makes it so cool and much better than the "big boy" Windows Server 2008.

Agreed on all counts. I have found, though, with Dell if you tell them something like what you mentioned about the RAM, they will find a way. But, still your way is likely better.

Now, you had me experimenting. I had always known that /remote got me to RWW and /owa got me to Outlook Web Access, but I never tried adding Sharepoint's port number to the end of my secure domain name:

https://server.domain_name.org:987 would take me directly to Sharepoint. Not on the server but on my desktop. Just as fast as being there. Of course, I can never explain the benefits of Sharepoint unless one uses it, but now it is even better:

Every shared folder and file, calendar, user websites, all URLs, contacts right there. I don't know how many times I have RDPd into my computer to open Sharepoint to find a password. How stupid was that.

Of course, the other cool, cool thing with Exchange is setting up RPC over HTTP. This way if you have Outlook on your home computer it is connected to Exchange in real time. They are one and the same. You can send an email to yourself, and they will arrive at exactly the same time. So, from home anyway, you don't need OWA. Of course, you do from another computer.

I know of some offices that use only OWA even in their office rather than Outlook.

Those were the primary reasons I opted for SBS 2011. You get the premium functionality without paying the premium price. For some reason, some IT pros strongly advocate against using SBS 2011 and say that wouldn't recommend it to a client. Sure Server 2008 is more powerful and more expandable, but when you're a physician with your own private practice, you don't really need the possibility of expanding beyond 75 users or buying separate licenses for SQL and Exchange. I also intend to implement all three.

The reason most IT pros don't recommend Small Business Server is because they aren't IT pros. SBS requires them to learn:

1. Active Directory
2. Sharepoint
3. Exchange
4. SQL Server if you get the premium edition

Most IT "people" I see around here** barely know how to network Winodws XP in a peer-to-peer environment must less implement Active Directory properly. Put them behind a Server 2008 R2 box and they scream bloody murder.

**When I say "here" I mean my hometown and surrounding areas. I clearly cannot speak for those who live elsewhere but I suspect similar experiences.

I really think some days there should be a certification or something for IT folks to take so they can prove they can do what they say they can do.

Migrate from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2010? Yeah, done that.

Upgrade from Sharepoint 2.0 to 3.0? Fell asleep doing it.

Use SQL Server Integration Services to parse HL7 and 835 files to automate importing encounters from various EMR's and entering insurance payments into our billing software automatically? Some of my best work.

But that's me. And I consider all that "computer 101" type of stuff. Most IT guys are no where near that - AND THEY CHARGE WAY MORE THAN I DO!!!!

It ain't right, I tell you.

JamesNT

This is just a perfect time to talk about IT. Referring to someone as one who specializes in Information Techology is like talking about someone who does electrical work on the side, but is not a licensed electrician.

I am not denouncing users on here because they do not have access to a trained IT person, but I think a good many have someone who does a lot of computer stuff and charges them to help with their computers and their networking.

I wouldn't let the level of my IT determine what OS I had. First, Windows Server 2008 has Active Directory. Sharepoint is already set up in SBS. I think it is easier to install SBS, run a wizard and start receiving email via Exchange than it is to install Exchange 2010 in Server 2008. Finally, once again, SQL Server generally comes with the premium editions and runs the databases of many of the functions of SBS.

Shortly, once installed, SBS has AD, Sharepoint and Exchange ready to go right out of the box. And, they have to do nothing with SQL.

With a little reading and going through it with some DVDs, one can quickly install their own SBS, although I would advise getting some professional help.

I suppose there are IT people who can't network XP in a P2P, but again, who is the IT person. I would argue that they don't fit the definition of IT.

I have to be missing something here.

They do have certifications for IT.

Microsoft Certified IT Professional
Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist (Windows SBS 2008 or put whatever you want there)
Microsoft Certified System Administrator
Microsoft MVP in certain areas.

Most IT people are way ahead of the curve. They are beta testing SBS 2008 long before it comes out.

And, most of these people can be found. If you Google, Microsoft Certified, you will likely find a computer store within a 50 mile radius with certified ITs.

Exchange 2003 to 2010? Haven't done that.

Upgrade from Sharepoint 2.0 to 3.0? Yes, but had 15 cups of coffee and certainly didn't fall asleep.

And, there is no way the using SQL Server Integration Services to parse HL7 and 835 files is Computer 101.

LoL! Don't feel bad. You are not alone. I actually know better, and am still doing it. Just be sure to back up.

Bertimus Prime,

You and I seem to be developing an interesting rapport. I must admit, I find it fascinating.


My apologies for not being clear. A hair stylist or barber has to be licensed in order to open a business as a hair stylist or barber. In my state, pretty much everything has to have some sort of license. Except IT. There are plenty of certs, you are quite correct, but what I meant to say is they should be licensed.

You are also quite correct that installing SBS is easy. It's the trouble-shooting part that gets to be real fun. Of course, I have rarely had an SBS box throw up on me, but it has happened. Furthermore, one does get the occassional request such as "can I receive email from more than one domain?"


I'm sorry, Bert, but I have to vehemently disagree. Most IT people are so far behind the curve there is no curve. I know IT types right now who haven't even looked at Windows 7 yet and are still clamoring to install XP. There are some IT guys, such as myself and yourself, who are all over the newest technologies as soon as they come out, but most of these guys learn new tech by installing it on your production network when they have no choice because what they are used to isn't available anymore. The gentleman's comment about having to get 2003 because his IT guy doesn't know the 2008 era stuff is all to common. Indeed, many of the IT guys I knew back in 2003 - 2005 aren't around anymore. They just couldn't keep up.

It may be that you and I have had different experiences in this area. If so, more power to you since you have clearly had the better experience(s).


Now this comment I do agree with. There are good guys out there, but they have to be found and paid for.


102?

JamesNT

Can we agree on 102.5?

Of course, Bert. Anything for you.

Please tell me you caught the movie reference on your name.

JamesNT

Yes, I got it. Actually, there is some irony here. A while back (at least two years), I used to write all the time on here that the three biggest factors in what an IT/pretty good at computers/or better than the one they are helping will recommend is:

1. What they personally like (if they like Windows Server 2008 over SBS 2008, they will likely recommend it.
2. If they want it, but don't have it, they will have fun playing with your money. Kind of like a parent living through their kids in sports or whatever.
3. And, the most important is they recommend what they are good at. It's much easier for them to support.

Now, there's a lot to be said about the latter, but if it comes at the expense of better technology...well...

So, speaking of server configs, I have been shopping for multiple processor server configs for clients, and have been eyeing Dual Opetron 6314s, with 8x2GIG RDIMM per processor.

The plan would be to run KVM as the virtualization platform, and then the win2008 server as one VM, along with an Ubu10 server, and one or more VM desktops as well.

Pricing out RAID SSD as well for the DB and Imported Items.

Point 1:
Are you sure about the SSDs? MLC aren't recommended for enterprise applications and SLC SSDs are quite expensive. Another thing is that there haven't been any longevity studies conducted on SSDs. Sure they are fast, but I would be hesitant to implement them in a business. Price per GB is still quite high compared to enterprise HDDs.

Point 2:
You should look into AMDs new processors that are set out to be released Q3 this year, the Interlagos, 16 core and the Valencia, 8 core. They are supposed to be much faster than their Opteron counterparts.

Vostro doesn't really tell us anything about the hardware, Win 7 Pro doesn't tell us much either

Sandeep,

JBS (Jon) was just kidding. You will know when you get to know him, he has the sharpest wit on the board.

___________________
To put the last few posts in perspective:

I have absolutely no idea what you guys are talking about.

Yes, JamesNT, Jon and John. I said it.

There is something I don't know. LOL.

If we keep posting about all these "hot rod" servers, Jon B is gonna raise the price of AC again! Suffice it to say that many of us have servers that are not coming close to being worked very hard. It's just kinda fun to have MORE POWER!

What's fun is a domain.

Bert does know what we are talking about. He is just trying to keep a reasonable limit on how many different kinds of questions he can answer himself.

JamesNT

-ASUS Sabertooth X58 LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard

-Intel Core i7 950 Quad Core CPU

-OCZ Reaper HPC R2 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)

-Scythe SCMG-2100 Sleeve CPU Cooler

-CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX 650W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power Supply

-Antec Three Hundred Illusion Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case

-4 Western Digital Caviar Black WD6402AAEX 640GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drives running in a mirrored/striped RAID 10

I bought this on black friday and it took me forever to get working correctly. Ended up being a bad memory controller on the CPU. I have never had a CPU be bad out of the box on any of the numerous builds I've done so I never expected that it would be the problem. I RMAed the motherboard, changed memory multiple times, got the run around from the motherboard manufacturer, the memory manufacturer, and Intel until I finally figured that it had to be the CPU. RMAed that and bam, everything worked perfectly. So much fun! lol

This reminds of a gaming desktop minus the graphics card. Are you using an onboard RAID controller or a external RAID card for the RAID 10 setup?

As a note to anyone getting SBS 2011, I highly suggest you get at least 12GB of RAM instead of 8GB indicated on the MS website. We are idling at 12 GB with 4GB to spare.