Help with LAN Planning

[Ben Factor]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I would greatly appreciate assistance from someone who does know a lot about local networks. What follows is a mouthful, so if you don’t know local networking quite well, don’t like puzzles, it probably won’t be that fun of a read. Sorry about that. If anyone can help, that would be great!

I have an old, wired local area network of my home-based business. The functions that are used are print sharing, MS Office 2003 document sharing, and internet access. There are currently six computers on a Windows-based network. They all connect to the network via network cabling with RJ45 plugs at both ends.

The network architecture is as follows: (1) DSL internet connectivity arrives via wiring from the phone jack, to a DSL modem; (2) the modem is wired into a “Vonage Device” wired router, which allows VOIP service on two phone lines and provides four RJ45 jacks that can connect of various computers; (3) the server (which is also a work station), and 1 “client” computer are wired directly to the Vonage router; (4) to reach the other 4 computers and the shared printer, the Vonage router is wired to a “switch”, which, in turn, is wired to those 4 computers and to the printer.

As stated, the server is also a work station. It has an old Pentium 4 processor, and its operating system is Windows XP Professional, Version 5.1, Build 2600, with Service Pack 2. . Four of the 5 “client” computers are also old Pentium 4 computers, which run XP. One of the clients is a temporary addition, a laptop from around 2008, which runs on the Windows Vista operating system.

Two of the old P4 client computers have gone down. They must be replaced.

It’s an appropriate time to evaluate the entire network, to decide what computers should be purchased, and how they should be configured. The network has been undesirably slow for awhile. It takes too long to sit at a client computer and open an MS Office document on the server.

I know almost nothing about the important variables to create a faster, more efficient network of this size and usage. Some questions:

Will a network of this scale operate much better with a dedicated server?

What determines the speed with which an MS Office document can be opened on the server from one of the client computers? Is it (1) strictly the quality of the server, or (2) a combination of the quality of the client computers and the quality of the server, or (3) the network software itself, or (4) a combination of (1) and (3), or of (2) and (3).

If I have to replace a couple of computers, should I get a more expensive i-7 server with a solid-state hard drive, or should I get a less costly server, and upgrade extra client computers in the network? And should the server be dedicated, or at least placed in the network at a location where it gets little use as a work station?

Should I convert to a Linux-based network altogether, and employ Open Office instead of MS Office? I read that Linux networks are superior, and that old computers on old Windows operating systems may run better on Linux. Does Open Office/Linux have all the functionality and third party software compatibility of MS Office/Windows? In particular,

(1) We use Excel to manage customer data, and, on three of the client computers, mail merge from Excel to do a lot of faxing, utilizing the Winfax software and Fax4Word software. Will Winfax and Fax4Word run on Linux and with Open Office? Or would it be necessary to install a simulated Windows software on top of Linux, and continue to use MS Office? Does simulated Windows software on top Linux defeat the purpose and effectiveness and speed of even switching to Linux? Or can 3 client computers continue to use Windows operating system, not Linux, and still be part of a Linux network?

(2) We us Adobe Acrobat a lot. Does that run on Linux?

(3) At least one client computer uses some more sophisticated functions in Excel--index, match, sumproduct used for conditional addition and counting, some simple three-line Visual Basic macros. Are those functions available and just as effective in Open Office, or would that computer also require simulated Windows software and MS Office on top of Linux?

If Linux is the way to go, given that I have a pretty capable guy here to execute software additions, will it all work out fine, and without a steep learning curve? Or is it challenging to learn to use Linux and Open Office, to the extent that the learning curve will hamper even those network users who do simple stuff, like creating text and spreadsheet documents or making sales calls from a prospect list on a spreadsheet, and then keying in notes after each call is made?

If anyone here can assist with some of these questions, that would be great. If not, and someone knows of a good resource, that would be great in the alternative.

One way or another, I have a get at least a couple of computers, and I want to move things in a more efficient direction.

Thanks,

Ben

 

[Ghiedo27]

A new server with faster (and more redundant) storage could help dramatically. An SSD might be a great option there depending on how much data you're storing and your budget. You may or may not need to set it up as a separate computer, but I would at least set the files you want to share on a different physical drive than what the OS is installed on. You may also want some extra ram on that machine and use a 64bit OS so you can take advantage of it.

What model of switch are you using? I think it makes sense to get your network up to gigabit speeds if you're not already there. Depending on the quality of the cables you may only need a new switch and network cards. I'd also move all of the end devices to the switch. Your router most likely doesn't support gigabit speeds, but there's no need to replace it if everything can talk directly through the switch.

Now might be a good time to consider a backup solution, as well.

 

[JackMDS]

@Ben, Welcome to AT Forums.

As you can see the post was posted yesterday, it was viewed 120 times and only one answer.

I doubt that people on any Forum will spent the time to read and digest such a lengthy post and then take an hour (or so) to write even longer answer post.

Some aspects of your post can be easily search and you will find an answer in few seconds.

Like: "We use Adobe Acrobat a lot. Does that run on Linux?".

It take few seconds to find via Bing/Google that the answer is Acrobat Reader Yes, Pro (Editor) No.

Make a priority and start with something much shorter.

 

[serpretetsky]

I will add one thing: i always try to isolate the problem down as much as possible.

You said that documents open slowly over the network (excel right?).
First of all, if you have very large excel databases i know people generally recommend upgrading to some dedicated database software (i'm not familiar with this subject, so i cant help you here)

However, here's an easy thing to try: We're not sure if you have a network bottleneck or a hard drive bottleneck on the server (hdd speed) right?

Are the files always slow to open, or do they open and edit much faster after you initially open them (are you waiting for the HDD to spin up after it goes to sleep?). Try opening the document on one computer, and then immediately open on a different computer (to avoid any caching the same computer might attempt). any speed difference?

I also often recommend trying a ramdisk solution since its free and completely elminates the hard drive bottleneck.

For example: ImDisk Virtual Disk Driver is a software i test with sometimes, it will allow you to create a virtual hard drive that you can copy and share your documents on, and the entire drives resides in your SUPAH FAST RAM. Try it and see if it dramatically improves your speeds. If so, maybe you do want an ssd (or at least you know your drive is running slow).

On the network side: how fast are you computers connected to the network (10Mb/s, 100Mb/s ?). If it's 10Mb/s make sure you get rid of any networking hubs in your network. Are you using windows file sharing for your server? (SMB/CIFS)

Just switching to linux wont necessarily make things better.

 

[JackMDS]

There is also the Vonage issue that the way it set and dependent on temporal use might stifle the LAN (especially if it is Not a whole Giga LAN).

 

[talion83]

As others have mentioned you probably want to break this up into several smaller questions as many of them are not necessarily related.

Also, a budget would be appropriate.

The issue you have right now is figuring out where the bottleneck is - is it from the Server, the network, or the client - or even a bit of both. Performance Monitor counters would probably help a bit here in discovering where you are cap'ing out.

Though if I had to make an initial assumption - I would believe the initial issue to be the server. If your network is at least 100mb I doubt it is the network. 2 phones don't use up that much bandwidth and neither should the computers.

Depending upon the data size a SSD could certainly help as someone mentioned. As a system admin I prefer RAID configurations and unless you have a small amount of data, chances are that going with SSD will be expensive.

 

[kepler]

Honestly, sounds like the only thing you may need is a NAS (short of new workstations you want to get).

If the network is 100mbit, that should be enough for opening documents. Short of speed/duplex mismatches, I don't think the network would be an issue.

I suggest a NAS so you get some redundancy. Anandtech has a bunch of info on them, but you can get a RAID1, two drive NAS pretty cheap.

Pick one up, plug it into any network port, most come with software to find it/set it up. Assign it a static IP, set up file sharing, then map drives to your client machines. That will take care of the server replacement and give it some redundancy.

The rest of the machines, upgrade as you please.

If you really want a network upgrade, grab a gigabit router (vonage devices should work with just about anything out there) and a gigabit switch.

I would still get the NAS though, instead of relying on an old windows box for file sharing.

 

[Ben Factor]

I want to apologize each of you who responded to me--Ghiedo27, serpretetsky, JackMDS, talion83, and kepler. I should have expressed thanks much earlier, and I'm inclined to explain, but really, there is no sufficient excuse, so let's leave it at "I'm sorry."

I am grateful to have been pointed in a number of directions, and having returned from some business and personal travel, am going to check, test, and try some of what each of you has suggested.

Thank you again, Ben