Trish Sanchez said:
Hello everyone. First let me start off by saying that I am new to this forum but plan to be on here much more often. I am checking something for a friend of a friend for their small business. They want to run 2 servers on Win 2003 server software. 1 server is for sales, finance and IT and the other will run operations, shipping and admin. Cost is a huge issue and the only thing set in concrete is that they will be running 2003 server on both systems. What kind of hardware would you recommend for this?
If they plan on going with the 2 servers, to me it would seem to make a hell of a lot more sense to organise it this way:
Server 1: Sales, Finance, Admin
Server 2: IT [whatever they mean by that I dont know], operations & shipping.
You say small business, so I assume you're talkin <50 users? If so, for simple file sharing, a pentium 4 would probably do it. I wouldnt imagine a large amount of contiguous connections for an operation like that.
You may want to keep the likes of the e-mail server seperate [i.e Domino running on either win 2003, or even Win 2k would do it].
I know form my own office, that if the e-mail goes down, the business grinds to a halt. [I work for an insurer].
So you could maybe run e-mail & maybe a blackberry server from one machine, you could run all your databases from another [for sales, shipping etc], and one other machine to handle lightweight tasks & file sharing, and possibly use it as thew back up for the others, so at least if they go down, you're data has been saved.
You could run them all off one decent server, but you immediately lose redundancy, and seperation of operation. i.e, if one system goes down, at least the others dont.
As for specs of any of those machines - you dont need a monster at all. Any modeern server grade hardware would do it, or if going on the cheap, you could build some reliable, dual core machines from off the shelf parts, with say 4GiB ram each, and some decent HDD's for a few hundred $$ each.