topic Re: Recommendations for test box in Operating System - HP-UX

Recommendations for test box

Doug_3 — Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:35:46 GMT

We are using a 9000 N 800, 8 gig, 4 cpu, 12h array and fc-10 fiber channel jbod, 11.00 os.

We would like to purchase a test box that is relatively cheap (and probably from the secondary market as a lease return). Can any one make some recommendations on models? I would like a rack mount; we can also use our xiotech san for storage, though the inexpensive fc-10 is fine. I am wondering if the k, l, or other class machines would work as a good test environment.

tia
Doug

Re: Recommendations for test box

Ken Hubnik_2 — Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:39:35 GMT

Any of the L class servers would be a very good bang for the buck and you can get this remarketed and a great price.

Re: Recommendations for test box

harry d brown jr — Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:47:48 GMT

An L, but also another N would actually be the better fit, depending upon exactly what you are testing the box for. If you chose a K, you can purchase one cheaper than leasing one.

live free or die
harry

Re: Recommendations for test box

A. Clay Stephenson — Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:56:30 GMT

Because of the cost, I would lean towards an old K. They are dirt cheap now on the used market so that leasing makes no sense. You do want something that will run 64-bit so the bare minimum would be a K250. You want something with at least a PA-8000 processor.

I actually prefer two levels of test boxes. 1) test which is usedc to replicate the production environment and where application development occurs. 2) Sandbox where patches, OS releases, database patches and releases are first applied. Deployment on the sandbox means that developers' time is not blown because you loaded some whacko patch.

In this scenario, two cheap K's beat a newber but more expensive L or N.

Re: Recommendations for test box

doug hosking — Sun, 20 Oct 2002 10:01:46 GMT

For 11.00, you have a lot of choices. K, L or N likely all make sense. One obvious question is how long you expect this system to be in use, and how many OS upgrades you expect to do on it in the future. Given the age of the K series systems, it seems a safe bet that they won't be supported by HP forever. Everything else being equal, I'd be inclined to go with the L or the N if you want less risk of support headaches in the future.

Re: Recommendations for test box

Leif Halvarsson_2 — Sun, 20 Oct 2002 18:08:32 GMT

Hi

Have you looked at the rp2430. You can get a new, modern rack-mounted server for about 2000$. Or perhaps less if you buy without disk and use a 3-party disk.

Re: Recommendations for test box

doug hosking — Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:13:44 GMT

Leif's suggestion about the rp24xx (previously known as the A500 series) is certainly worth considering if that's powerful enough for your needs. I had initially dismissed that option because I assumed it wouldn't be powerful enough, given the existing configuration you mention. Not knowing the details of your applications, etc. it's hard to guess. You can't argue about the price (especially recently), they're very small, and consume only modest power. They're the workhorse in my group for simple development/test/debug work, and I have nothing but good things to say about them for that use. However, something like the L series would give you more options in terms of processor count, I/O capability, etc. if that's of concern to you and, with newer HP-UX releases and appropriate hardware configuration, may give you the option of using things like virtual partitions for extra flexibility in configurations.