1 Nov
2005
1 Nov
'05
4:52 p.m.
On Nov 1 2005, 16:09, Jules Richardson wrote:
possibility?
Chuck Guzis wrote:
> This may be appropriate for another list, but it seems to me that
there's
> plenty of applicable knowledge here.
>
> Right now, we're using an older Compaq Deskpro P3-600 box as our
incoming
> Linux server. Basically, it connects with the
DSL modem and
contains IP
> masquerading, DNS caching, firewall and
fetchmail/procmail/qmail
tasks
> (SpamAssassin included). It runs 24x7 with no
problem, as it has
for the
last 5 or 6
years. Built like a tank.
Would an offering from one of the various UNIX vendors be a Sun / SGI / HP or something? I'm thinking that
getting away from any
kind of Intel CPU would be a good place to start, plus of course you
don't need any kind of framebuffer then either (unlike a PC) and can
just use a serial console on the (very rare) occassions when you'd
need
to be physically at the machine.
Cut memory to bare minimum too as that's probably a major culprit of
current draw.
If the machine's not doing any logging to local disk then you can
eliminate the hard drive too
I disagree with a few points there. Firstly, SpamAssassin is very
resource-hungry. It works best with a fair amount of memory. It also
tends to be very slow - I've seen it take 4-10 seconds *per message* on
a slow machine. That might not matter on a machine handling a very
small amount of mail, of course.
Then you can't really have your incoming-mail handler run diskless,
because if you do, something else will have to run 24/7 to store the
mail. Better to have just one machine. But find a modern slow drive
rather than an old slow drive; slow drives use less power than fast
ones, but modern ones use less than older ones. Laptop drives are
often pretty low-power.
However, many of the Sun/SGI/HP type of machine might run more quietly
since they don't need big fans for CPU and PSU. They also don't need a
framebuffer as Jules said, *and* no keyboard. But they will tend to be
slow, and you'll have fun trying to doing all the IP masquerading
firewally stuff on anything but Linux or BSD, which is going to be more
trouble than it's worth on most of the above.
FWIW, I think Tim's suggestion (mini-ITX) is amongst the best.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
1 Nov
1 Nov
4:55 p.m.
Pete Turnbull wrote:
On Nov 1 2005, 16:09, Jules Richardson wrote:
possibility?
Yes, I went and missed the Spamassassin point in the original message :(
It probably does change things unfortunately as it means that a much
more powerful machine's needed than otherwise, and memory requirements
go up too.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
>This may be appropriate for another list, but it seems to me that
there's
>plenty of applicable knowledge here.
>
>Right now, we're using an older Compaq Deskpro P3-600 box as our
incoming
>Linux server. Basically, it connects with the
DSL modem and
contains IP
>masquerading, DNS caching, firewall and
fetchmail/procmail/qmail
tasks
>(SpamAssassin included). It runs 24x7 with no
problem, as it has
for the
last 5 or
6 years. Built like a tank.
Would an offering from one of the various UNIX vendors be a Sun / SGI / HP or something? I'm thinking that
getting away from any
kind of Intel CPU would be a good place to start, plus of course you
don't need any kind of framebuffer then either (unlike a PC) and can
just use a serial console on the (very rare) occassions when you'd
need to be physically at the machine.
Cut memory to bare minimum too as that's probably a major culprit of
current draw.
If the machine's not doing any logging to local disk then you can
eliminate the hard drive too
I disagree with a few points there. Firstly, SpamAssassin is very
resource-hungry. It works best with a fair amount of memory. It also
tends to be very slow - I've seen it take 4-10 seconds *per message* on
a slow machine. That might not matter on a machine handling a very
small amount of
mail, of course.
Of course if a seperate server's on site running as a mail store and
distribution hub then it might make sense to run spamassassin there
rather than on the firewall machine, and keep the firewall as cut to the
bone as possible (this is what I do back home, although my mailserver
box also doubles as my fileserver)
However, many of the Sun/SGI/HP type of machine might
run more quietly
since they don't need big fans for CPU and PSU. They also don't need a
framebuffer as Jules said, *and* no keyboard.
Plus the cases are very small form-factor compared to a typical PC
offering, and you get a NIC built-in (although that's probably true of
all minature PC motherboards these days too)
But they will tend to be
slow, and you'll have fun trying to doing all the IP masquerading
firewally stuff on anything but Linux or BSD, which is going to be more
trouble than it's worth on most of the above.
Yep, I'd definitely stick Linux or BSD on one rather than the 'proper'
OS just for convenience sake.
FWIW, I think Tim's suggestion (mini-ITX) is
amongst the best.
I suppose it depends on how much is available to spend - used Suns and
the like can be had for free, versus a certain amount for a mini-ITX
board (I've not found people throwing out the latter just yet, although
give it a couple of years...)
Mind you, I suppose it's harder to find extra NICs for a
Sun/SGI/whatever versus a PC...
cheers
Jules
8:44 p.m.
On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 21:55:29 +0000
Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Pete Turnbull wrote:
When people start throwing out mini-ITX boards it will be because they have
'expired' as they are commodity-PC stuff and not built-to-last. A Sparc IPX that
is ten years older then them will still be chugging along, most likely.
FWIW, I think Tim's suggestion (mini-ITX) is
amongst the best.
I suppose it depends on how much is available to spend - used Suns and
the like can be had for free, versus a certain amount for a mini-ITX
board (I've not found people throwing out the latter just yet, although
give it a couple of years...)
Mind you, I suppose it's harder to find extra NICs
for a
Sun/SGI/whatever versus a PC...
I got several Sbus ethernet cards for the price of shipping and a little bit from a list
member here recently.
--
http://sasteven.multics.org/MacSE30/MacSE30.html
6:02 p.m.
On 11/1/2005 at 9:52 PM Pete Turnbull wrote:
However, many of the Sun/SGI/HP type of machine might
run more quietly
since they don't need big fans for CPU and PSU. They also don't need a
framebuffer as Jules said, *and* no keyboard. But they will tend to be
slow, and you'll have fun trying to doing all the IP masquerading
firewally stuff on anything but Linux or BSD, which is going to be more
trouble than it's worth on most of the above.
Hmmm, the Compaq Deskpro was built at a time when Compaq seemed to care
about quality. The PSU fan isn't one of those 4" screamers, but a slower
4.5" very quiet model. The expansion card backplane is plugged into the
motherboard and pulls out from the chassis for easy card servicing. There
are air intake holes at the bottom rear of the machine so that the airflow
first passes over the motherboard and actually makes some sort of sense and
keeps the floppy drive and CD pretty clean. No annoying little cheap fan
on the CPU heatsink either.
Maybe I can't do MUCH better than that.
Are 5.25" IDE drives any more reliable than the 3.5" models? I've got a
few old Quantum units--the largest is about 8 GB, but I'm using a 3.5"
Maxtor in the box right now.
Cheers,
Chuck
6:20 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Hmmm, the Compaq Deskpro was built at a time when Compaq seemed to care
about quality. The PSU fan isn't one of those 4" screamers, but a slower
4.5" very quiet model. The expansion card backplane is plugged into the
motherboard and pulls out from the chassis for easy card servicing. There
are air intake holes at the bottom rear of the machine so that the airflow
first passes over the motherboard and actually makes some sort of sense and
keeps the floppy drive and CD pretty clean. No annoying little cheap fan
on the CPU heatsink either.
Maybe I can't do MUCH better than that.
Probably not. If the Soekris boards don't have enough juice, the
mini-ITX Eden boards would be the next step up. Some of the mini-ITX
cases use wall-wart PSUs, so it's conceivable that your disk would be
the only moving part.
Are 5.25" IDE drives any more reliable than the
3.5" models? I've got a
few old Quantum units--the largest is about 8 GB, but I'm using a 3.5"
Maxtor in the box right now.
The failure rate on the Quantum "Bigfoot" series was spectacular, and
they're slow as dirt. A fast (5400rpm) 2.5" IDE disk will draw very
little power, generate a tiny amount of heat, and perform reasonably
well. Conversion kits to attach to a 40-pin ribbon & power run about
$12-15.
Doc
6 Nov
6 Nov
6:25 a.m.
On 02/11/2005, at 8:52 AM, Pete Turnbull wrote:
FWIW, I think Tim's suggestion (mini-ITX) is
amongst the best.
A good choice if you want to use something new. I used to use an old
Digital Multia (alpha based) running Linux to do this sort of thing.
Quiet and certainly on topic. For something more recent perhaps one
of the HP/Compaq "Windows terminal" devices that are supported with
Linux. ISTR these are StrongARM based.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies at kerberos.davies.net.au
Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the
Australia | air, the sky would be painted green"
7:13 a.m.
Huw Davies <huw.davies at kerberos.davies.net.au> wrote:
On 02/11/2005, at 8:52 AM, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Keep in mind that for me (and many others) the mini-ITX isn't
just a suggestion, it's an implemented solution that's hosting
hundreds of GBytes of web content/mirrors on a few dozen virtual
domains and also mail/mailing-list stuff.
While the Multia isn't the most power-sucking computer out there
(it's really quite good) it cannot beat the 25W that the mini-ITX
server draws.
For contrast (and some on-topicness) the mini-ITX server replaced
an Alphaserver 2100 with two 7-drive RAID arrays. And it has much
more CPU and disk space than that box did too, while drawing about
one-thirtieth the power. I do not at all miss booting the 2100 into
Windows NT just to configure the EISA RAID controllers!
Tim.
FWIW, I think Tim's suggestion (mini-ITX) is
amongst the best.
A good choice if you want to use something new. I used to use an old
Digital Multia (alpha based) running Linux to do this sort of thing.
Quiet and certainly on topic. For something more recent perhaps one
of the HP/Compaq "Windows terminal" devices that are supported with
Linux. ISTR these are StrongARM based.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies at kerberos.davies.net.au
Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the
Australia | air, the sky would be painted green"
6833
days inactive
6838
days old
6 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
chenmel＠earthlink.net -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
huw.davies＠kerberos.davies.net.au -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
pete＠dunnington.plus.com -
shoppa_classiccmp＠trailing-edge.com