What's the Best Server for Home Use?

vrmlguy writes "I've seen recent posts about low-power, off-grid computing and about small systems, but neither quite captures the object of my desire. I'm looking for the ideal LAMP-based server for home use. Cost of ownership (though not TCO!) is one of my primary concerns, followed closely by reliability. Here's my idea of the perfect server. The software requirements are easy. I want to run Slash, WIKI and/or blogging software that I and my family can access worldwide. The system should be able to keep up with requests coming in via DSL or cable-modem, but doesn't need to withstand slashdotting. There are Linux-based systems available for under $200, which appeal to me as a low-cost base. I would want to add at least one additional disk for OS-level RAID. Also, since this is a server, it will need to be available 24x7, which could run up my electric bill. Therefore, I'm willing to spend a bit more for something that supports a 'napping' mode that can, say, spin down the disks and slow down the CPU, but still respond to web-page requests. Are there systems available that do what I need at a price I can afford?"

Comments

This is easy.

[adolf]

Since nowhere in your post did you mention that it must be a fast machine, and your desired goals are very light-weight, just buy a cheap, slow Pentium machine from Ebay or a place like this.

Save energy how you can, if it's important to you. Toss the CPU fan, and keep the heatsink. GlobalWin makes some huge Socket7 heatsinks which are suitable for this, all of which come with easily-removed fans screwed to them.

I've got a P133 which has been running various incarnations of Windows (now 2k) for years, with only a quiet PSU fan and a modest 6.5gig Seagate drive which spends most of its life spun down. It's nearly silent, doesn't make much heat, and I don't even think about its power consumption.

Configuring hdparm/apmd/kernel/BIOS to put the system to sleep would be good. As long as you don't let it drop into suspend mode, it'll come right back to life as needed.

Avoid hardware that you don't need. Don't use a sound card, find a slow/old/efficient video card. Keep things simple.

If you're worried about the reliability of a used machine, don't be. Remember, only the moving parts are subject to wearing out in normal use. Of these moving parts, you'll be completely eliminating the CPU fan. You can buy a nice new Sunon or Panaflow fan to replace whatever comes with the PSU, either of which should last a long, long time (the last dead fan I replaced was a Sunon that I've had spinning for 8 years).

All that's left is the hard drive, and you'll probably want to buy a couple of new ones no matter what you do, anyway, so that you've got two of them that match for your RAID.

That all said, I'm not exactly sure how this is Ask Slashdot material -- even if it's not something Google easily spits out answers for. Since specifications are so decisively absent, and cost is a factor, there's no way in hell you're going to listen to any of our suggestions, as none of them will be nifty enough or cheap enough for whatever purposes you actually end up using the thing for.

I strongly suspecct that you're either lost trying to figure out what kind of horsepower you need for the software you haven't picked yet, or that you already have a good idea of what you want and are looking for some sort of devine Slashdot Affirmation of your unspoken decisions. But you didn't ask us for software advice, or moral support - you asked us about hardware.

Running a glorified bulletin board for a small household is not a difficult task for a computer -- I had hundreds of users dialing into my 10MHz XT a decade ago, and things were plenty fast. WWIV under DOS, FWIW. In other words, the slowest computer capable of running Linux is more than fast enough for your purposes.

Find yourself a nice 386SL notebook, and be happy. The one I have here draws less than 12 Watts at full tilt, and the hard drive spins up in less than 2 seconds. Powersaving features are built-in, and the box supports killing the power to unneeded accessories. I just put Slackware 8.1 on it tonight, and things are looking good with a $2 PCMCIA network card. I bet an old Tandy/Northgate/AST/Blue Dolphin/Honeywell/AT&T/whatever 386 would work just as well, with a slight power-efficiency disadvantage.

And if you think you need anything faster than a 7-year-old Pentium desktop with RAID or a 10-year-old notebook for your family to write notes to eachother not more than several times a day, call Dell and buy yourself a new Optiplex or Dimension or whatever it is that they're hawking these days.

Or, stop complicating life by making things so simple, and invest in a corkboard and some scrap paper, plus a few moments to consider a proper location in which to put them.

Can we do better?

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody seems to think that a low end Pentium machine is fine as far as power consumption goes. I think we should be able to do better than that: There are much more efficient solid state systems with low-power cpus. Something along the lines of the cerfcube comes to mind. We have the technology to move away from i386 based machines, especially in the small server arena. Let's do it.

Re: raid and backup - not the same.

[ip_vjl]

So when the basement floods, or a fire breaks out, you can feel secure knowing that not one, but two copies of your data were destroyed at the same time.

RAID != backup.

Raid == fault tolerance. When one drive goes bad, your data is still ok.

Backup is for allowing you to get a system up and running again in the face of total catastrophy. Like a meteor hitting the house.

So use raid setups, but don't think you are off the hook for doing backups. Not unless you really could do without the data.