Re: Blade server recommendations?
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 02:58:54PM -0700, Jesse Molina wrote:
> > 2. Heartbeat - no serial cables.
>
> I don't know about the HP/Compaq models, but the IBM's have a shared
> backplane which is accessible via a second Ethernet interface for each
> blade. So, you can get your OOBM or heartbeat off of that. Also useful
> for clustering communications.
Yeah, the HP BL20's have that too. In fact, every blade has 3 network
interfaces - 2 for the blade, and one for the ILO (oob management).
Oh, and the BL20's have real 3.5" drives, 2 of them each. None of that laptop
drive business, as in the HP BL10's, which I do _not_ recommend. We have 2
BL10 chassis, and pretty much _every single drive_ in the BL10 blades has
died in the year or so we had them. So steer clear of those guys.
> And while you didn't ask, and I hate to say it; with the exception of
> web hosting, 90%+ of all blade server implementations that I see are
> unjustifiable. They could have used a couple of 1Us, or didn't need
> multiple systems at all.
Yeah, that's also been my impression.
You can fit 8 BL20 blades in 3U's; but you also need a power chassis which
takes up another 3U I think, but can be shared by up to 2 (?) BL20 chassis.
So you're not even saving that many U's with BL20's. At most you're doing 16
blades in 9U.
For the BL10's the story is a bit different, since 10 of those fit in 2U if
I'm not mistaken. But the drives...
Bye for now,
Ward.
--
Pong.be -( "In my opinion M$ is a lot better at making money than )-
Virtual hosting -( it is at making good operating systems." -- Linus )-
http://pong.be -( Torvalds )-
GnuPG public key: http://gpg.dtype.org
Reply to: