We prepared a budget for FY 2012 this weekend at the sprint and for SAC
it includes:
- $3500 for OSU OSL as a token payment for the services they provide.
- $5000 for a new server
- money to pay for the peer1 server for half the year implying we will
be off it by the end of June.
- $200 for DNS name registration.
I'm afraid I just spoke up on behalf of what I thought SAC needed
without having solicited input from the broader committee. I
appologise, but since I hadn't asked around earlier I just spoke up
from the point of view of what I thought.
Perhaps we could open a discussion around what sort of hardware
would be useful (presumably hosted at OSU OSL) for circa $5K.
I'm assuming roughly one more server sort of similar to those we
have now to move VMs around on giving us additional redundancy
and to reduce VM crowding.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer
We prepared a budget for FY 2012 this weekend at the sprint and for SAC
it includes:
- $3500 for OSU OSL as a token payment for the services they provide.
- $5000 for a new server
- money to pay for the peer1 server for half the year implying we will
be off it by the end of June.
- $200 for DNS name registration.
I'm afraid I just spoke up on behalf of what I thought SAC needed
without having solicited input from the broader committee. I
appologise, but since I hadn't asked around earlier I just spoke up
from the point of view of what I thought.
Perhaps we could open a discussion around what sort of hardware
would be useful (presumably hosted at OSU OSL) for circa $5K.
I'm assuming roughly one more server sort of similar to those we
have now to move VMs around on giving us additional redundancy
and to reduce VM crowding.
Best regards,
The other major option we've discussed in the past is a large file server for storing the backups instead of the current Backup VM. Which would give us greater flexibility to store backups for longer and to backup more things (which is debatable).
Having recently bought (in my research lab) an 8 core, 64 GB RAM, 9 TB server for just under $5000 - that budget is plenty adequate.
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Alex Mandel <tech_dev@wildintellect.com> wrote:
The other major option we've discussed in the past is a large file server
for storing the backups instead of the current Backup VM. Which would give
us greater flexibility to store backups for longer and to backup more things
(which is debatable).
Having recently bought (in my research lab) an 8 core, 64 GB RAM, 9 TB
server for just under $5000 - that budget is plenty adequate.
Alex,
Have a storage server that would, among other things, take
on the backup role, and give us a place to dump VM snapshots
sounds like a great idea to me.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer