Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 70
  1. #1

    Looking for Colo (100+ Servers)

    I represent a host with over 100 servers dispersed over a few data centers. Our server bill is over $20,000/mo so we are thinking about switching to Colo. We have the financial backing so we just need to evaluate whether the reward is worth the hassle.

    How much do you think we could save? Hard to say how much bandwidth we use in total but I would say 100gb per server is a good average. I have approached a few compies such as SoftLayer who don't offer Colo and they have done their best to dissuade me saying that in the end we'll be getting huge power bills and won't be able to scale the service etc.

    I'm interested in hearing from anyone that has done the change from leased server to colo hosting. Also does anyone have any recommendations as to a data center that offers colo?

    Oh, lastly, how does a host that runs on colo come up with a product line. Meaning how does one get the servers and hardware etc?

    As you can see, I don't know the first thing about colo so would really appreciate any input.

  2. #2
    What are your current server configurations? This will assist in determining how much power you would need approximately. Also what is your current bandwidth usage? What is the purpose of colocating your servers in multiple datacenters? It would be best if you chose a datacenter closer to where you are so you could access hardware easily for onsite suport. You can buy hardware from vendors such as rackmountsetc.com, lsiserversolutions.com, dell.com, apaqdigital.com, colomachine.com etc.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    L.A., CA
    Posts
    3,706
    I think you can indeed save a lot of money. 20 servers per cab, 40A cab @ $700/month * 5 cabs = $3500.

    Then all thats left for monthly bills is your bandwidth. 10,000GB (100*100), Let's round this up to 20,000 @ 100Mbits 95th percentile.
    Lets round that up to 150Mbits, and say $16/Mbps = $2400

    $3500+$2400=$5900/month

    Only thing after that is your one-time capex for machines basically.
    Keep it simple, and just stick to colocating in a DC that has a nice multi-homed network and you won't have much more in monthly cost.

    Another great server vendor I recommend is www.rackmountspecialists.com

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    272
    How much do you think we could save? Hard to say how much bandwidth we use in total but I would say 100gb per server is a good average. I have approached a few compies such as SoftLayer who don't offer Colo and they have done their best to dissuade me saying that in the end we'll be getting huge power bills and won't be able to scale the service etc.
    You're looking at a rack fee of at least $3,500/mo going with a lower end provider to support 100 servers with a little growing room (three racks). Most collocation (if not all) is going to be billed via 95th percentile, and you could probably put a few servers on 1Mb if they're relatively low usage. You're looking at at least 30mbit of bandwidth, which would be fine with 3x10mb racks. For power, you should be able to buy energy efficient hardware and get away with the standard power provided with your racks. (or 2x20A drops, whatever)

    I'm interested in hearing from anyone that has done the change from leased server to colo hosting. Also does anyone have any recommendations as to a data center that offers colo?
    I have some space in DataGram in New York and in Colo4Dallas in Texas, and recommend them both. The space I have in Colo4 is a full rack, and I couldn't be more satisfied.

    Oh, lastly, how does a host that runs on colo come up with a product line. Meaning how does one get the servers and hardware etc?
    You have to find a hardware platform (or set of hardware platforms) that work for you and run with it. A lot of companies use SuperMicro servers as a starting point, as they are extremely reliable server class boxes and less expensive than OEM's like Dell and IBM.

    As you can see, I don't know the first thing about colo so would really appreciate any input.
    I think collocation sounds like a good choice for you. However, you need to get the numbers together for hardware costs, etc. and calculate whether or not you want to put the money out there to make the change. It's going to take a lot of manpower to move those servers off of your distant providers onto your new servers. You will need PDU's, switches, and cabling to get your rack set up and pay for labor to have the servers installed if you are not installing them yourself. If interested in Colo4, I would recommend calling Patrick Chapa via the number on their website and he will help you figure out what you need.
    Last edited by hermetek; 02-28-2008 at 04:24 AM.
    ██ HermeTek Network Solutions
    ██ Network design, security, and implementation
    ██ BSD & Linux consulting, training, and hosting
    ██ https://www.hermetek.com | 1.866.235.1288

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    L.A., CA
    Posts
    3,706
    He's definitely going to need more than 30Mbps, I can guarantee that. He will also need 5 cabinets and 40A per, so the $3500 is good for that, he won't have any left over with $3500 budget.
    My calculations included a lot of "bumping" up for safety, so in the end his bill could actually be less than $5900, but even @ $5900 its low enough to justify the move to colo.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    272
    Completely agree, I was lowballing it and giving him a best-case-scenario. He said above 100GB/server which would be 300GB/1mbps which would be cutting close, if not going slight over, 30mbps. I do agree that he should need more.

    If he builds 1u's there is no reason he couldn't do 3 full racks with 40A per rack and 35 machines per rack... Most datacenters can handle the cooling capacity that would require and the power should be sufficient for low-end to mid-range machines.
    ██ HermeTek Network Solutions
    ██ Network design, security, and implementation
    ██ BSD & Linux consulting, training, and hosting
    ██ https://www.hermetek.com | 1.866.235.1288

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    L.A., CA
    Posts
    3,706
    The problem is I don't think he can fit 35 servers on 40A.
    2 x 20A circuits = 32A usable. He will probably have specs that use at least 1A or above of power per machine.

    Either way, his situation definitely warrants going to colo

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    These prices for power are not realistic. The power costs more than the cabinets. Anyone charging $700.00 per cabinet with 40 amps of power won't be in business for long. You can assume $15-$20 per amp beyond the first 20 amp circuit.

    Colo is much cheaper than dedicated servers in the long run. You should be able to cover your server costs within 6 months.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    221
    This thread should be saved as the rebuttal to everyone that ever asks "WHY IS COLO MORE EXPENSIVE THAN DEDICATED?!?". This is a perfect example where even moving to a premium provider would save you a great deal of money in the long run. You can even limit your Capex by leasing hardware up front, making colo a no brainer.

    Good luck on your search!
    Anthony M. Faoro II - tmf [at] adtaq.com - (425) 444-8787 ex 7000
    Seattle Colocation @ Adtaq Internet | Seattle, WA | Be Happy!
    AIM TonyAdtaq | GTalk tmf [at] adtaq.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    389
    I say first look around at your area for colocation facilities. With 100 servers you want to be close to those servers in case there are any problems. Colocation is more about power, bandwidth and rackspace and not support. Many places charge a lot for remote hands (100+ / hour) and may be lacking on what those remote hands can do. Also make sure you are colocating at a place that will at least give free reboots.

    Power prices will vary by location. In the New York metro area expect $20 per amp over what is included in the rack. Texas will run lower and may go down to $10 per amp over.

    Colo is not for everyone but you will likely save money. Also you will have total control over your hardware. If you choose a carrier neutral facility then you will have control over your own network as well.
    John Quaglieri - InterServer, Inc

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    237
    Colo has definitely saved us money. We're in Atlanta and have lots of room to grow. You can get more than 40A per cab, but it may cost more above the 40A level due to the density.

    -Chris

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA
    Posts
    438
    I believe at your size, you should definitely explore colo.

    That said, the above posts are painting a picture of what its going to be like that is, I think, a little naive/waxing over some points.

    You are aware that you will be spending somewhere between $50,000 and $200,000 in capex for hardware, if you buy (btw, leases may definitely be a better way to go - they often include free replacement hardware for hardware failures.. guess what Newegg won't give you for free if it dies 6 months after you bought it? That's right, everything). Assume you buy, expect to maintain a budget of likely $5,000+/yr for replacement hardware.

    Regardless of how you get the hardware, who's going to install it? Upgrade it? Add to your fleet when you buy more? Repair servers when they break? If its you, someone(s) pulling down a salary(ies) for it. If you're outsourcing/using a colo-provided service for it, you're paying them.

    Who's going to do your migration? Have you considered what will be involved?

    Do you have anyone on-staff that can handle the networking side of things? If not, you're going to have to hire someone, train someone, or find a colo that offers that level of service (and you'll be paying for it).

    I would seriously look at this deeply before you make the decision to go colo. There are some serious advantages.. and some serious disadvantages.

    At your size, I would wager there's a more than 50% chance that even with all the little (and huge) extra costs that nobody has really mentioned here, you'll still end up ahead on your balance sheet. But it is going to involve more staff, and more work than dedicated hosting. (Especially if you're reselling, which it sounds like you might be -- someone's going to have to start doing what your dedicated providers presently do for you -- watching, vetting, and procuring new servers for you to sell on a regular, on-going basis).

    Quick edit:
    Basically what I'm saying is -- all those dedicated hosting providers you have? All the stuff they do for you? The colo will be doing almost none of it for the base rental + power + bandwidth charges. You'll be paying them extra, or you'll be having to build out your company to handle the various parts of running your hosting business that have heretofore been transparently handled for the bundled price of your servers at your dedicated hosting providers. From network management to inventory.. none of it will be as transparent as it was with a dedihost, and none of it is free.
    Last edited by Nex7; 02-28-2008 at 01:27 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,561
    Question: what are the specs, or what would be the specs of the servers?

    Generally speaking for that amount of servers, it would be more cost effective to go ahead and just colo, although of course you're going to making a large investment into the actual hardware.
    ColoInSeattle - From 1U to cage space colocation in Seattle
    ServerStadium - Affordable Dedicated Servers
    Come visit our 18k sq ft. facility in Seattle!
    Managed Private Cloud | Colocation | Disaster Recovery | Dedicated Servers

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by NexSeven View Post
    I believe at your size, you should definitely explore colo.
    You are aware that you will be spending somewhere between $50,000 and $200,000 in capex for hardware, if you buy (btw, leases may definitely be a better way to go - they often include free replacement hardware for hardware failures.. guess what Newegg won't give you for free if it dies 6 months after you bought it? That's right, everything). Assume you buy, expect to maintain a budget of likely $5,000+/yr for replacement hardware.
    This is a great point. I'm not sure what your hardware specs are, but you might also consider higher end VPS's.
    Slicehost - Xen VPS hosting
    Community - Forums, wiki, chat and technical articles

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeol View Post
    I represent a host with over 100 servers dispersed over a few data centers. Our server bill is over $20,000/mo so we are thinking about switching to Colo. We have the financial backing so we just need to evaluate whether the reward is worth the hassle.

    How much do you think we could save? Hard to say how much bandwidth we use in total but I would say 100gb per server is a good average. I have approached a few compies such as SoftLayer who don't offer Colo and they have done their best to dissuade me saying that in the end we'll be getting huge power bills and won't be able to scale the service etc.

    I'm interested in hearing from anyone that has done the change from leased server to colo hosting. Also does anyone have any recommendations as to a data center that offers colo?

    Oh, lastly, how does a host that runs on colo come up with a product line. Meaning how does one get the servers and hardware etc?

    As you can see, I don't know the first thing about colo so would really appreciate any input.
    You will save a ton of money and recoups your costs in ~6 months with colo - many of our clients have done this move for the same reason you are considering it: growth and savings. Just make sure you find a solid provider that has been through this before as their experience is invaluable to your success.



    Kind Regards,

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    374
    Don't forget your networking hardware.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ashburn VA, San Diego CA
    Posts
    4,571
    The primary concern of mine if I were in your situation, would be placing 100 servers in the hands of a 3rd party colocation company and whatever bandwidth and financial stability they are working on.

    With the number of servers you have, a 10x10 or 10x20 private cage (if budget permits) and roll-your-own bandwidth from a couple Tier1 or Tier2 carriers might make more sense.

    Eliminate the middleman if possible.
    Fast Serv Networks, LLC | AS29889 | Fully Managed Cloud, Streaming, Dedicated Servers, Colo by-the-U
    Since 2003 - Ashburn VA + San Diego CA Datacenters

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by FastServ View Post
    The primary concern of mine if I were in your situation, would be placing 100 servers in the hands of a 3rd party colocation company and whatever bandwidth and financial stability they are working on.

    With the number of servers you have, a 10x10 or 10x20 private cage (if budget permits) and roll-your-own bandwidth from a couple Tier1 or Tier2 carriers might make more sense.

    Eliminate the middleman if possible.
    But then they have to run a network on top of the colocation, which they very well might not be ready, or want to do.

    One thing to keep in mind on something like this, if you bought colocation from a provider and buy from Tier1/Tier2/whatever (not the colo providers network) you will be pretty much on your own for any configuration, traffic engineering, maintenance, and just plain out right "help" with the network when you need it. This sounds great in theory, however, it's not as simple as it sounds for the most part. Level3, Global Crossing, ATT, Savvis, etc isn't going to take a help call from you and help configure your router or try to help deploy a configuration that will scale for you over the long haul. What they will do is say, "Our stuff is ok, thanks for calling!"

    There is some value add in getting a package from a provider and paying a bit more at least on the initial move to Colocation. I would definitely look at that side of the story before you go off and make yourself an island.

    Quite honestly, the "Middleman" (which most of us on this forum would be considered) help make migrations like this smooth and enjoyable instead of a disaster. Don't be so quick to "Cut them out".
    ____________________________________________
    Brian W. Gemberling
    Pryme Technologies LLC
    http://www.pryme.net

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeol View Post
    I represent a host with over 100 servers dispersed over a few data centers. Our server bill is over $20,000/mo so we are thinking about switching to Colo. We have the financial backing so we just need to evaluate whether the reward is worth the hassle.

    How much do you think we could save? Hard to say how much bandwidth we use in total but I would say 100gb per server is a good average. I have approached a few compies such as SoftLayer who don't offer Colo and they have done their best to dissuade me saying that in the end we'll be getting huge power bills and won't be able to scale the service etc.

    I'm interested in hearing from anyone that has done the change from leased server to colo hosting. Also does anyone have any recommendations as to a data center that offers colo?

    Oh, lastly, how does a host that runs on colo come up with a product line. Meaning how does one get the servers and hardware etc?

    As you can see, I don't know the first thing about colo so would really appreciate any input.

    teratomic.com offer very good colo prices. servers are located in the Cogent Washington DC Data Center.
    Last edited by Alex; 02-28-2008 at 07:29 PM. Reason: Requested
    Let's talk custom servers and reseller plans

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,955
    In our experience working with clients that are receptive to recommendations is a nearly ideal situation. The Colo provider can provide and manage the networking equipment if you do not want to - we do this all the time for clients. Providers are there to help - again - the primary concern should be finding a reliable and knowledgeable provider to work with. They will be able to communicate the things you have no knowledge about, nor do you want to know about. Focus on excelling at your work while the provider excells at theirs.



    Kind Regards,

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    1,434
    We have around 100 servers and for us the choice is clear - lease dedicated servers. Sure it "costs" more in terms of pure dollars and cents, but in return we have a company or companies with experts making sure the network is working, replacing hardware in less than 2 hours, deploying complex setups and strange hardware combinations for us, providing support for complex issues and advanced setups, and managing everything else hardware wise under the sun.

    We may pay $20,000+ a month for this, but it beats having to hire more hardware and network gurus, buy the hardware, put it all together, keep spares on hand, explain procedures to remote hands, have "gurus" on call for emergencies, etc... For some companies this level of management meshes well with their expertise or resources, but in our case, leasing frees us up to focus on support and innovation, which supplies more than enough profit to afford the high cost of leasing.

    - John C.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,024
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnCrowley View Post
    We have around 100 servers and for us the choice is clear - lease dedicated servers. Sure it "costs" more in terms of pure dollars and cents, but in return we have a company or companies with experts making sure the network is working, replacing hardware in less than 2 hours, deploying complex setups and strange hardware combinations for us, providing support for complex issues and advanced setups, and managing everything else hardware wise under the sun.

    We may pay $20,000+ a month for this, but it beats having to hire more hardware and network gurus, buy the hardware, put it all together, keep spares on hand, explain procedures to remote hands, have "gurus" on call for emergencies, etc... For some companies this level of management meshes well with their expertise or resources, but in our case, leasing frees us up to focus on support and innovation, which supplies more than enough profit to afford the high cost of leasing.

    - John C.
    Very well put. It's like health. You will invest now, or you will pay later. Either way, you will pay regardless.
    <<< Please see Forum Guidelines for signature setup. >>>

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    550
    Based on the responses so far, it definitely appears you should examine the possibility. Do consider carefully all costs. Throwing things up in Excel and projecting things out 5 years might make it easier to examine things.

    Some people mentioned risks, like server hardware failing, etc that you don't have to deal with using dedicated servers. That is indeed true, and with 100 servers, the chance of 1 having a failure is more likely than if you had only 10 servers. We do colo and have only about 30 servers. To date (5 years so far) we've only had minor hardware failures like a hard drive failing, and this has not been an issue since all our servers are RAID1. However, the chance of a more severe hardware failure does indeed exist, which is why we keep a few extra servers online and on-hand in case one needs to be brought online. It's potential hassles like that which you should consider.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ashburn VA, San Diego CA
    Posts
    4,571
    Quote Originally Posted by rackguru View Post
    But then they have to run a network on top of the colocation, which they very well might not be ready, or want to do.
    <snip>
    That is an extremely valid point. When you are dealing with a colo provider as rock solid and dependable as PTPtech, it's a no brainer to sign that deal.

    Unfortunately there isn't a PTPtech in every market =). We've learned (been burned) the hard way.

    Just choose the colo wisely. If you can't find solid recommendations in the market you want to deploy, consider what I've said.
    Fast Serv Networks, LLC | AS29889 | Fully Managed Cloud, Streaming, Dedicated Servers, Colo by-the-U
    Since 2003 - Ashburn VA + San Diego CA Datacenters

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    North Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    2,565
    Why not build out your own DC?

    I'm just throwing that out there because we're working on 2 projects both for customers in the 100 server range. One is a complete DC buildout and one is just a colo build.

    It's something to think about depending on the level of control you want to have over your infrastructure.
    Aaron Wendel
    Wholesale Internet, Inc. - http://www.wholesaleinternet.net
    Kansas City Internet eXchange - http://www.kcix.net

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    939
    Let's say in our case the last 30 servers we have bought if priced out at the larger dedicated providers they would cost roughly $700/mo each or $21k/mo total. Our entire colo bill for those 30 servers is <$5k/mo. I also enjoy doing colo because I have full control of the environment. On many occasions when renting out dedicated servers in the past I've experienced getting bad hardware swapped with more bad hardware or not even having the proper parts available. When it is my own hardware I know exactly what it is, if it's brand new, etc. Another case in point is many times you buy a "RAID card" from a dedicated provider, in our case disk I/O is very important so we get to hand pick our hardware for our needs -- many times from a dedicated server provider you get what is economical, not what is best -- how many dedicated providers offer BBU's with their RAID cards?

    Overall I think colo is the way to go for anyone and I seriously wonder how some of my competitors get by having to pay 4x more per month than I do. My only guess is that they are forced to grow whereas if I pull back growth for a month I end up not having to purchase hardware and can build up capital very quickly.
    Matt Ayres - togglebox.com
    Linux and Windows Cloud Virtual Datacenters powered by Onapp / Xen
    Instant Setup, Instant Scalability, Full Lifecycle Hosting Solutions

    www.togglebox.com

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by 6PS-Chris View Post
    Colo has definitely saved us money. We're in Atlanta and have lots of room to grow. You can get more than 40A per cab, but it may cost more above the 40A level due to the density.

    -Chris
    Of course if the data center can't keep the power on it doesn't really matter how much power they can give you.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    86
    I think also something that nobody has really pointed out is how this might change some of your taxes/etc. When you get a dedicated server it's a 100% deductible monthly expense. This might not be true depending on how you get the servers. If you outright purchase, that's 3 years of depreciation on the servers. If you do a lease with $1 buyout that's a capital lease, again 3 years depreciation. Something else to think about as well.

    If you are making say $10,000 a month ($30,000 total revenue - $20,000 costs) going to colo might very well save you a ton, however, it might end up something like...

    $7,500 costs for monthly colo
    $10,000 costs for leasing hardware
    $2,000 more a month in taxes

    You just saved $500 a month and now have the headache of maintaining all these servers physically.

    On that end, I obviously (since I sell Colo) think it's PROBABLY cheaper (30%+ cheaper easily) but there are more issues at hand than just, "I will save this much a month". Get some rough numbers together on the real costs with everything and talk to your accountant as well as the techies on WHT.
    ____________________________________________
    Brian W. Gemberling
    Pryme Technologies LLC
    http://www.pryme.net

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by AFerrier View Post
    The problem is I don't think he can fit 35 servers on 40A.
    2 x 20A circuits = 32A usable. He will probably have specs that use at least 1A or above of power per machine.

    Either way, his situation definitely warrants going to colo
    We can fit 35 servers in a rack, the Core 2 Duo Supermicro boxes use ~0.8A so there is no issue at all getting 35-36 in a cabinet.

    My advice, find a location that has room for you to grow and is flexible in giving you room to grow. It is also beneficial to find one geographically close, in case any issues arise. Also, at least to start, you'd likely want someone that offers reliable 24/7 on-site support, unless you're planning to have your own people on-site.

    For the hardware I recommend checking out Amadi Systems and they work with a great leasing company if you need to lease the boxes.
    Karl Zimmerman - Steadfast: Managed Dedicated Servers and Premium Colocation
    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
    Now Open in New Jersey! - Contact us for New Jersey colocation or dedicated servers

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    I'd also be concerned about drive failure when you pack your servers in to tight. I've seen people try to pack 30-35 servers in to a cabinet. They might have enough power but unless they have spot cooling the cabinet will get like an oven. Drives will start dropping very quickly. From my own experience I'd probably never put more than 25-30 1u servers in a cabinet. Even then I'd make sure I could distribute the open spaces as well as can be planned.

    If you are talking about dual power supplies I'd never stick more than 20 in a cabinet with 1U between each.

    Most the time the issue is the power but at some point it becomes the problem of cooling.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by mgphoto View Post
    I'd also be concerned about drive failure when you pack your servers in to tight. I've seen people try to pack 30-35 servers in to a cabinet. They might have enough power but unless they have spot cooling the cabinet will get like an oven. Drives will start dropping very quickly. From my own experience I'd probably never put more than 25-30 1u servers in a cabinet. Even then I'd make sure I could distribute the open spaces as well as can be planned.

    If you are talking about dual power supplies I'd never stick more than 20 in a cabinet with 1U between each.

    Most the time the issue is the power but at some point it becomes the problem of cooling.
    As Karl mentioend with adequate cooling you can easily fit 30-35 1U systems into a cabinet.

    We have multiple cabinets of 34 1U Supermicro (SC512L-260B) systems running great in a single cabinet. You don't require spot cooling only adequate airflow int eh chassis to excahnge any heat. As long as you are bringing the cold in the front and the hot out the back and not letting the heat sit in the cabinet you are fine.

    I generally see heat problems in cabinets where people are sticking 20 different systems into a cabinet of all different depths and airflow characterisitics, then they pile a PDU and switches at the back of the cabinet restricting natural vertical airflow further compounding their heat issues.

    All in all it's what works best for your chosen platform. We very carefully tested out solutions to achieve maximum revenue/sqft of space without sacrificing quality or reliability of systems.

    Plan ahead and enjoy success, don't just scramble to find a solution and later find yourself doign the same becauase you had an epic failure in planning

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,103
    Switching to colo, thats a tall order, human factor is the single most important thing you should consider, by that I mean the people who would service your equipment, I am sure you have a remote crew helping your hosting clients, but day to day maintenance and support of the hardware will take its toll after you setup the colocation, things you should consider.

  33. #33
    Thank you all so much for such valuable input. We are not in any position to have on-site staff. So all things like reboots, hardware replacements, hardware troubleshooting etc will need to be done via the data center staff. I can't be close because I don't live in the States and our remote staff are scattered around the world. Essentially what I'm looking for is Colo that feels much like we have now with renting servers.

    If we do this the Colo staff will need to setup the racks/cabinets, do all the networking and manage everything. I realise this will cost more (if it actually exists). Is this even advisable? Has anyone made the switch to Colo when they don't even live in the States? It's all starting to sound very much like a tall order.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    L.A., CA
    Posts
    3,706
    With more established providers what you need is still fully viable and pricing wouldn't be that bad. It all depends on what the provider is willing to do for you to earn your business and what resources they have available.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeol View Post
    Thank you all so much for such valuable input. We are not in any position to have on-site staff. So all things like reboots, hardware replacements, hardware troubleshooting etc will need to be done via the data center staff. I can't be close because I don't live in the States and our remote staff are scattered around the world. Essentially what I'm looking for is Colo that feels much like we have now with renting servers.

    If we do this the Colo staff will need to setup the racks/cabinets, do all the networking and manage everything. I realise this will cost more (if it actually exists). Is this even advisable? Has anyone made the switch to Colo when they don't even live in the States? It's all starting to sound very much like a tall order.
    I've worked with a number of places where customers have never even seen their equipment so what you are describing isn't a rare scenario. If you have the capital to either outright purchase or obtain a lease from say Dell it's very simple to make a decision on your colo needs.

    In an arrangement where you intend on relying on purely remote hands it's to your advantage to first select your colocation provider before you select your hardware and network. In many instances providers will have a preference on hardware platforms, network equipment, etc. It's in your best interest to follow their guidelines of brand recomendations to maintain an environment of equipment that they are familure with and can easily service. If you can save $10 by purchasing a Brand XYZ switch instead of a Cisco you'll probably end up paying for it 10 fold in remote hands / management time just to get their staff to be able to get the device working.

    $0.02

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeol View Post
    Thank you all so much for such valuable input. We are not in any position to have on-site staff. So all things like reboots, hardware replacements, hardware troubleshooting etc will need to be done via the data center staff. I can't be close because I don't live in the States and our remote staff are scattered around the world. Essentially what I'm looking for is Colo that feels much like we have now with renting servers.

    If we do this the Colo staff will need to setup the racks/cabinets, do all the networking and manage everything. I realise this will cost more (if it actually exists). Is this even advisable? Has anyone made the switch to Colo when they don't even live in the States? It's all starting to sound very much like a tall order.
    Zeol,

    I believe outsourcing hardware to the datacenter is a good idea if they know how to do it. The reason is simply because if something happen, it would be easier to manage and you know that the datacenter is the one whom you can ask for help, like a one-stop-shop. We have seen many people switch from dedicated server to colo because of they want to own the server for lesser overall cost so it is more common.
    <<< Please see Forum Guidelines for signature setup. >>>

  37. #37
    One piece of advice - don't buy 100 cutting edge servers. Buy one and make sure it works perfectly and the kernel supports all the hardware first. Also the sites on 100 older servers would probably fit on 50 new servers and still run with half the load as the old.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,574
    The colo model is not that scalable or reliable in the case of the OP. With a dedicated server provider the OP can add a new server in few hours as well upgrade/downgrade/cancel servers on demand yet choosing the data center with the best deal at the time and putting the eggs in several baskets worldwide.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeol View Post
    If we do this the Colo staff will need to setup the racks/cabinets, do all the networking and manage everything. I realise this will cost more (if it actually exists). Is this even advisable? Has anyone made the switch to Colo when they don't even live in the States? It's all starting to sound very much like a tall order.
    Quote Originally Posted by RyanD View Post
    In an arrangement where you intend on relying on purely remote hands it's to your advantage to first select your colocation provider before you select your hardware and network. In many instances providers will have a preference on hardware platforms, network equipment, etc. It's in your best interest to follow their guidelines of brand recomendations to maintain an environment of equipment that they are familure with and can easily service. If you can save $10 by purchasing a Brand XYZ switch instead of a Cisco you'll probably end up paying for it 10 fold in remote hands / management time just to get their staff to be able to get the device working.

    $0.02
    What happens if the OP after a while decides to move to another colo? Who will manage the move, provide the logistics, install and configure the equipments?
    Last edited by dotHostel; 02-29-2008 at 05:33 AM.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by dotHostel View Post
    The colo model is not that scalable or reliable in the case of the OP. With a dedicated server provider the OP can add a new server in few hours as well upgrade/downgrade/cancel servers on demand yet choosing the data center with the best deal at the time and putting the eggs in several baskets worldwide.





    What happens if the OP after a while decides to move to another colo? Who will manage the move, provide the logistics, install and configure the equipments?
    You say that like you hop around monthly. Obiously the OP isn't goign to be moving around every month.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hanoi
    Posts
    4,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dotHostel View Post
    What happens if the OP after a while decides to move to another colo? Who will manage the move, provide the logistics, install and configure the equipments?
    That's why you will need to plan carefully when choosing a colo vendor. We are not in the US, but since moving to colo, I am happy. We can choose the hardware we want, and it saves monthly charge, saves administration work, when we can use big servers instead of more small servers. We have moved datacenter once. I have to admit there are some small issues when migrating accounts, but if you have a good plan, I can say it can be moved smoothly. No problem at all. We have learned many things after that move.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •