|
Cp-Coder wrote: So my Macrium images take less than a minute to create
So if it slowed down by say 10% then that would be too slow?
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimately that's all that matters, doesn't it.
If you have a measurable difference in performance, stick with your current method.
|
|
|
|
|
fgs1963 wrote: Awesome! I'm sticking with jet fuel!!
Next test is with the lawn mower?
|
|
|
|
|
I would imagine there's some overhead in processing a ton of file pointers to determine where the next chunk of a badly fragmented file is, as opposed to having a file stored in one continuous chain. Would that account for the difference? I have no idea.
Still. I don't know about Macrium's internals, but in theory, if a backup program worked by copying entire disks/partitions, as opposed to reading file systems, then it wouldn't matter how fragmented (or not) a disk is, or whether the software even needs to understand what file system is being used.
Of course that means backing up a 1TB drive that's only 10% full will back up 1TB and not 100GB. I have a 2-disk USB enclosure that's like this. There's a button on the front that, if held when powering up, will blindly clone one drive to the other, regardless of file system (assuming the target is the same or larger capacity). And if the source drive has tons of fragmentation, the individual cloned files will be as badly fragmented.
|
|
|
|
|
No. I have set up Macrium so that it only includes actual files in the image. So my images reflect the size of the used parts of the disk, not the entire disk. This works very well and I have restored my C: from such images dozens of times. Macrium also includes all partitions on the systems drive by default. It is really a fantastic utility for restoring your machine in case of some disaster.
Ok, I have had my coffee, so you can all come out now!
modified 17hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: I would imagine there's some overhead in processing a ton of file pointers to determine where the next chunk of a badly fragmented file is, as opposed to having a file stored in one continuous chain. Would that account for the difference? I have no idea.
The actual read operation(s) might not take much longer, but the host turnaround time will certainly affect things.
Optimized disk:
single read operation of N blocks
Fragmented disk:
read operation of N1 blocks
(host turnaround time 1)
read operation of N2 blocks
(host turnaround time 2)
...
where N1 + N2 + ... = N
Note that if the hardware implements read gather/write scatter operations and the O/S supports them, this may mitigate much of the host overhead due to fragmentation. I know that eMMC has such operations, and I assume that most other current protocols do, too.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
No "pointer space" reclaimed apparently. Some sort of reorg based on size and or frequency of use?
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
INTRODUCTION
Given the new accounting laws in our country, every company will need an accounting software that sticks to those laws.
Even freelancers (as me) will have to adopt a software like that.
I don't trust the cloud + I don't want to pay a fee every month to be able to use my accounting data.
Now I own a NAS which is more than enough for my needs but is not capable to run the accounting programs I will be able to use in my country.
Most of the accounting programs I could use require SSD and Windows to run.
Getting a server would mean:
* Getting a server, some SSD and HDD disks.
* Getting an UPS.
* Getting a small rack.
* Getting a Windows server license.
* Using our current NAS as backup for that server and keep doing our NAS extra backups with external USB HDDs.
QUESTION
What server / option would you recommend for this kind of job?
Would it be better to get a tower server? or a rack server?
As soon as we have children the server, NAS, UPS... will have to be placed inside a rack anyway.
It would be nice to be able to have a mix of SSD and normal HDD, SSD for the OS and the accounting program and HDD to store everything else.
+/- 8TB of data space available would be nice.
+/- 32GB RAM available would be nice.
Would it be better to install the accountant program inside a virtual machine? just to make it easier to move it from one server to another one in the future (if needed).
Do you agree that it's better to get a server than a normal workstation for all this?
And as a bonus... what would you use that server for apart of all mentioned before? Any additional hint/idea?
Thank you all!
|
|
|
|
|
Are there hardware requirements for the software ?
Are you the sole user of the data ? or your clients need access to the data ?
Whatever your do, make sure your backup work; plan regular tests of your backups.
I would use the server for a single purpose
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: I would use the server for a single purpose
That's a good idea. If he feels the need to overpay and get a beefy computer, then he can at least use something like VMWare Sever to split it up.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, the requirements on their web site are:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof...
|
|
|
|
|
As Maximilien says, one server per role. I would put all financial activities (accounting, billing, etc.) on the same server
Any decent financial package should allow copying the data from one machine to another - via backup and restore to the new machine, if nothing else. I would make sure that the seller has a documented method for transferring the software licence. Make sure of this before purchase!
Where financial data is concerned, backups are extremely important. Nothing is more important to the Government than money.
The specifications for the server depend very much on the requirements of the accounting etc. software. I would endure that the server is powerful enough to run all software simultaneously. You don't want to have to juggle between packages, especially if more than one person (e.g. you, your bookkeeper, and your accountant) are all using different programs simultaneously.
Mention of the accountant brings to mind another thing. If he/she is an external contractor, he/she will need access to your financial records over the Internet. Do you have appropriate security for the server?
Lastly, tax packages are typically validated for a given tax year, and are sold as subscriptions. Don't forget to budget for the subscription!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
I will be the only one remotely connecting to the server, at least by now, through a VPN and through the firewall.
Backups must be done as nowadays:
Keep one HDD copy at a different physical place and rotate it every month.
I will have to ask all them about migrating the license...
The requirements on their web site are:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof...
|
|
|
|
|
For financial data, you should also have a set of backups that are rotated off-site to a secure location on a regular basis. Assume the site with your server burns to the ground, how do you recover?
(how long to acquire replacement hardware, software, data. This will give you an idea of how long you will be down. How old is the offsite data? What data can be reentered into the system to bring an off-site backup to current status. That is part of what makes cloud services attractive is that they can replicate your data to other geographically separate data centers and allow rapid recovery from disasters. But it all comes at a cost.)
|
|
|
|
|
Currently we rotate every month the physical HDD where we make the backup and store it in a different physical place.
This should not change after getting a server (if we do it at all).
|
|
|
|
|
Joan M wrote: Even freelancers (as me) will have to adopt a software like that.
Dude seriously, if you're just a single person a Raspberry Pi will solve your needs if it runs on Linux (Windows ARM is still sluggish on Pis). If you need Windows you can get a tiny single board computer to run it for like $500 tops... probably less.
It's a single user for accounting data. You don't need much.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Personally for such a small/specific task, I'd get a Beelink-type mini PC (I've come to love these little boxes). The backup concern is something else. Offline drives? Off-site drives? Even a handful of USB sticks would do it. Encrypt as needed. Don't overthink this. End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
By now I am using a software in a pentium 3 computer with Windows XP which works perfectly well but that don't cope with the new legal requirements, been trying another one in my NAS PHP+MySQL based that works perfectly (performance wise) and almost well (accountant wise), but the ones I am seeing require to be able to execute Microsoft SQL Server and therefore they ask for:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof... so go figure...
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, by now I am using a software in a pentium 3 computer with Windows XP which works perfectly well but that don't cope with the new legal requirements, been trying another one in my NAS PHP+MySQL based that works perfectly (performance wise) and almost well (accountant wise), but the ones I am seeing require to be able to execute Microsoft SQL Server and therefore they ask for:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof... so go figure...
|
|
|
|
|
I can't say I'm familiar with the accounting software options that exist out there, but I can't imagine even a phone would be underpowered for simple accounting tasks nowadays. In terms of technical requirements, I mean, obviously you don't wanna use a phone for that.
But a server rack? 8TB of space? 32GB of RAM? Multiple hard drives and SSDs? Are you auditing the Pentagon?
Any machine ought to do IMO for running the actual software; the real expense, I think, is going to be your backup system. And I suppose this is where you can blow any budget, depending on how crazy you wanna get. But that's really a separate thing.
|
|
|
|
|
The requirements on their web site are:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof...
OF course I will have to store there 20 years of code, documentations, installation packages for the programs I have used and all their versions... Currently I have 6TB and I am using 80% of that.
PS: ARRRR, I have some other big files there that are not work related and kid sister safe too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joan M wrote: +/- 8TB of data space available would be nice.
+/- 32GB RAM available would be nice.
Nice wishlist! Are you sure this is not overkill?
I've got a 12+ y/o tower server in my home office. It was last rebuilt about 5 years ago when one of the original spinners crapped out, now running Server 2016 and no spinners, just 2 SSDs hanging out of the side and an external drive hooked up in the back.
This old box still easily handles everything I throw at it. It's roles:
0: fileserver (all company projects/documentation/etc.)
1: webserver (public facing websites and ftp/sftp services) currently serving around 25 or so company/customer web apps.
2: database server (sql server)
3: print server
4: email server
I'm considering moving the customer web apps/databases to the cloud and getting a laptop to run everything else.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
The requirements on their web site are:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof...
I plan to use it for the accounting software, GIT, PHP/MySQL, file server and nothing else.
Truly I'd love being able to keep my NAS and let all this go... 
|
|
|
|
|
If your accounting software needs that much horsepower, something's wrong.
Me? I'd instantly create a VM and be done with it. Now I tend to buy higher end laptops, and I always get at least 64GB of ram. But as others have said, an itty-bitty cube PC with an external USB drive and you are done.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
The requirements on their web site are:
Intel Xeon (*1) + 8 Gb RAM + 100 Gb SSD or SAS.
Given their crazy requirements I thought of getting something that could run that software and some of the things I have now in my NAS at the same time and make it a little future proof...
I agree you... something is wrong here... I have two options: paying for a monthly fee and not owning the program and therefore risking losing the data if I can't pay after a financial apocalypse (nothing that worries me much by now) or getting a massive computer and pay for a monthly fee to get maintenance... something that if I stop paying will leave me with a functional program and data.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
