What Goes into an Enterprise Network?

Komi asks: "I work for a big semiconductor company, and I'm part of a group that is spear heading the Linux movement here. Right now everyone uses Sun machines to design, but you can get a cheaper Linux x86 machine that is four times faster. So it is my job to prove that Linux works. The problem is that I'm an analog circuit designer stuck in the role of sysadmin. So I need some advice on what goes into a network. It won't be that large right now, but it has to be scalable for up to a couple of hundred machines. If this works, then hopefully we'll convince all designers at my company to make the switch."

"Here's the hardware that I am planning on getting:

• 2 servers:
  
  These would hold the home accounts and tools, as well as serve out NIS, NTP, etc. I know I'll need a lot of hard drive space (2x72GB SCSI each), but do I need a lot of memory? (It's 4GB RDRAM max.) Should the processor be fast, or dual?
  
  
• 3 batch machines:
  
  These would be a small compute farm running LFS or something. Jobs would get queued up and run continuously. So these should be dual CPU with lots of memory, probably 4GB each. Any other particular details?
  
  
• 10 desktop machines:
  
  These would be on the designers and developers desktops. These should be reasonably fast (~2GHz) single CPU machines with probably need at least 2 GB RAM. The simulations we run do not benefit from dual CPUs. They probably don't even need SCSI. I'm thinking a $2k PC should work.
  
  
• 1 Itanium server:
  
  This would be to play around on to test our 64-bit applications. The only advantage of 64-bit is applications using huge amounts of data.

We plan to run Red Hat 8.0 on these machines. Is there anything I'm missing? I don't have much redundancy in the servers. I plan to do backups to DVDs. Is this asking for trouble? Any further advice would be appreciated."

Comments

You're facts aren't quite straight.

[pmz]

So I need some advice on what goes into a network. It won't be that large right now, but it has to be scalable for up to a couple of hundred machines.

1) You had better find some damn fine PCs to replace those Suns, because a couple hundred PCs can make your life miserable due to lots of random breakage.

...you can get a cheaper Linux x86 machine that is four times faster.

2) This is not true (unless you found Pentiums with SPECfp of over 3000!). If you buy the right-sized computers for your task, the hardware costs won't be a dominating part of your budget. Human costs and non-OS commercial licensing will be, regardless of your platform choice.

Whenever people say that Linux is absolutely outright cheaper then commercial UNIX, then I'm pretty convinced they haven't figured out all the costs involved. Also, I'm not convinced they understand just how simple maintaining a Solaris box can be, for example, due to sunsolve.sun.com, ample documentation, optional support out the wazoo, etc.

Before you go blazing these new trails, just stop and think for a minute. Put aside the zealotry and really think hard about what is and is not cost effective. Regardless of your choice, you really need to be convinced it is the right one.

Re:Biggest troll ever?

[Zapman]

It's a big troll, sure. However it is also a chance to dispense some good advice:

1) There's a difference between PC's and 'Server Class' hardware. The biggest is testing. It will work, and it can be supported easily. Drivers are nice and available (generally speaking). Usually dual proc, usually RAID enabled. You can use RAID to speed up read access, but almost no one does. They use it for redundancy (in case a disk flakes out on you). How much money you spend depends on how much downtime costs. If it really costs, you need RAID 1+0 or 0+1. Go with hardware based RAID if you can.

2) Sun hardware. There are many more advantages to sun hardware than what's obvious. Never over look what a good support organization can do. You pay for it, but if something fried, I can have a part in my hands 4 hours later. Sun's low end desktop's are nothing to write home about. However, if you've got Ultra60's or SunBlade 1000 or 2000's, that's some really class hardware. You can do some supprising things with it. [1]

3) Dual procs. On Desktops, even if your simulations don't benifit from dual proc, if they take a while, and they eat that 1 CPU, you'll be happy to have a second (web browsing, etc). On your servers, it's effectivly a must.

4) RAM. On the servers, crank it. On the desktops, you should probably crank it.

5) Cost. If your work is anything like mine, you have 'capital' money, and 'O and M' money. When in doubt, over spec the machines, so that your less likely to have to request more money from the 'capital' pool than you initially quoted. "Going back to the well" viewed poorly.

6) NIS. NIS is evil and the plague. If your in a relativly local office with good connectivity, it's alright. If you try to spread it over WAN links, you're going to get hurt at some point.

7) NTP? Why run a seperate server when you don't have too. Leverage what's already in use in the company. This leads to my last point (and what was the best point of the parent)

8) Get yourself a real sysadmin. These are decisions that s/he is experienced in, and paid to do. Your trial by fire that would come from this will probably drive you insane. Good sysadmins are a rareish breed. I know, I am one. There are a fair number of good ones out of work now. Find one.

[1] The reason largely has to do with cache. Sun chips made in the last 2ish years have 8 MEGS of cache on them (that's even mirrored so it's 16 in total, but you can only use 8). We built a GIS app, and field tested it on Sun and Intel hardware. The intel hardware could deal with 1 to 4 users with less resources than the sun box could. However, the the sun box kept growing up to several hundered users, while the intel box started thrashing hard after 10 or so. We compared a dual US3 box to a dual Xeon P4.

not only hardware

[Ludoo]

as a previous poster said already, hardware is not the most important factor. you will eventually find yourself working on old or semi-obsolete hardware anyway, so getting top stuff is not a priority, especially given the number of users.
What I would concentrate in is:

• a single source for authentication (login) and profiling (groups, home dirs location, etc.); study pam a bit, a good option is to store everything in ldap and use pam_ldap; if security is a primary concern, consider kerberos
• network file sharing; you don't want your users' data scattered around on every desktop (your management costs will increase dramatically, and your backup strategy will be much more complex); nfs is quick and easy, but offers only decent performance and poor security; a good (but complex) alternative is openafs or IBM's DFS (which is the evolution of afs
• centralized backup on a single server, possibly running amanda so that you can backup different servers on a single medium; mondo rescue is a good option to backup systems periodically on bootable cds for quick recovery;
• standard distro, eg pick Redhat or Debian or whatever, based on a number of factors like ease of automating installation, software distribution and package management options, etc., and stick with it; reme,ber that you have to know your patricular distro well to handle emergencies (and emergencies DO happen);
• standard desktop, eg pick one of gnome or kde, develop suitable policies and management strategies, and stick with it; one of the factors in deciding a desktop is the toolkit used and its licensing, if you intend to develop custom software in the future;
• software distribution strategy, plan or at least try to learn a bit about possible ways to handle updates and software installation on your desktops (and servers); you can automate package management (apt or rpm) or enterprise software (red carpet or rhn);
• printing system, again for printing you have different options: lprng, cups, etc; check what printers/plotters you already have in house and if they're supported by printing systems;
• 
  Just a quick overview, to sum it up I would second the advice somebody else gave you in a previous posting: hire a decent sysadmin and plan things with him.

Re:Biggest troll ever?

[Komi]

This is not a troll. The issue is money. We can't afford to hire anyone, or to buy hardware. But we have a source of free loaner equipment. Our deal was to prove that their machines work, that way when design groups start getting money again, they will buy it from a proven source. So they asked us what we need, and I have to compile a list. This is a proof of concept on zero budget (except my salary I suppose). And it has to be all linux, because that's the deal.

Sysadmins will be hired for this once money gets freed up and we can prove to groups that linux works. A later post was correct that there are really two issues. a) Getting everyone to switch to linux, and b) getting designers to put linux on their desktop. We really only care about b), but by the nature of the deal, we have to prove a) and b). Also we don't care about the cost of switching a design group over to linux either. That's someone else's job. We just show that the end result works.

And finally, we do need 64-bit machines. Some of the programs we run use huge ammounts of data that need 64-bit to address them. So if we're getting free loaner equipment, then why not play with an Itainium? :)

I appreciate the advice from everyone.

Thanks,
Komi