Server for tiny office...

[Kelemvor]

Howdy,

I posted this over in Networking but didn't get a response so thought this might be a better place.

Our church is moving their office so we're taking this time to redo their network. The current setup is 4 computers that are used by the staff. Each person has their own computer. There is no "server" computer and they use email to share files.

At the new office they will be going to only 3 necessary computer so we'll have an extra. I'll want to turn the 4th PC isn't a sort of file server (shared drive) so they can share their files.

I'm looking for advice on how to best configure things there. The PCs all run Windows XP, there's no need for a Domain setup at all. There would be very little, if any, reason for someone to use someone else's computer.

Would it be easiest to just assign all the PCs to the same Workgroup within XP and just open up the 4th PC so Everyone can access it? Is there a better way to do it?

Would it be better to get a copy of Windows Server 2k3/2k8 and use that as a File Server? That's all it would be used for so not sure if it's really needed or not. Looks like non-profits can get a server OS for like $40 which is dirt cheap.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[sm625]

That is what I would do! Cant beat simple. Just keep in mind that this pc only needs to be a 15 watt via C7 or atom type system. If it is a full fledged desktop PC and a bit on the oldish side, it is probably idling closer to 100 watts. 100 watts for 10-12 hours a day is about $40 a year in electricity, at residential daytime rates anyway, with all typical surcharges factored in. I dont know about what churches pay for electricity.

 

[lxskllr]

Your first solution sounds like it would work fine. I definitely wouldn't buy an MS server. GNU/Linux comes with no cost, and no restrictions. Taking the above power concern into account, you could build a cheap server for ~$100 that uses very little power, and takes up very little space.

 

[Genx87]

Use an old workstation with XP and share out folders to the other 4 machines. There is a limit of 5 concurrent connections on XP. So this fits perfectly into your needs.

 

[Kelemvor]

Use an old workstation with XP and share out folders to the other 4 machines. There is a limit of 5 concurrent connections on XP. So this fits perfectly into your needs.

That's what I was leaning towards. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking anything.

Thanks all. I'll go with the simplest route and just use good, old XP.

 

[wlee]

I think Windows Home Server 2011 would be a better solution for you. In addition to file sharing, it would also allow you have have complete image based backups of all the WorkStations. I've had an HP Windows Home Server v1 running for the past 3yrs at a shelter I help out. It's worked great and saved them several times when they've needed to recovers files, and twice to recover entire crashed machines.

Though you prob can use your spare PC as a server, this is what I would recommend you use.


HP MicroServer
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/me/e...16-4237917-4237917-4248009-5153477.html?dnr=1



Windows Home Server 2011
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/products/windows-home-server
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/products/windows-home-server/help


Some Additional Reading
http://www.wegotserved.com/

 

[ultimatebob]

Your first solution sounds like it would work fine. I definitely wouldn't buy an MS server. GNU/Linux comes with no cost, and no restrictions. Taking the above power concern into account, you could build a cheap server for ~$100 that uses very little power, and takes up very little space.

Yeah, but then they're screwed if they run into an OS problem and you're not around to fix it.

Like it or not, your average "Joe Churchgoer" doesn't know UNIX.

 

[emptyshell]

Actually you did get responses. Try checking your original thread.

 

[Kelemvor]

I think Windows Home Server 2011 would be a better solution for you. In addition to file sharing, it would also allow you have have complete image based backups of all the WorkStations. I've had an HP Windows Home Server v1 running for the past 3yrs at a shelter I help out. It's worked great and saved them several times when they've needed to recovers files, and twice to recover entire crashed machines.

Though you prob can use your spare PC as a server, this is what I would recommend you use.

I'll know more on Thursday or Friday as to the specs of the machiens to know what the "server" computer will be. I don't know if it's even current enough to run Home Server or not. But if it's just for file sharing, it should be too big of a deal I'd hope.

They currently use Mozy to do backups so if the server could do that, then maybe they could save a few bucks and drop mozy. hmm.

 

[Kelemvor]

Actually you did get responses. Try checking your original thread.

Yeah I know I did now. They all came in today a couple hours after I made this thread...

 

[gmaster456]

I'll know more on Thursday or Friday as to the specs of the machiens to know what the "server" computer will be. I don't know if it's even current enough to run Home Server or not. But if it's just for file sharing, it should be too big of a deal I'd hope.

They currently use Mozy to do backups so if the server could do that, then maybe they could save a few bucks and drop mozy. hmm.

It's good to have onsite and offsite backups. If you do end up dropping mozy, Have all the machines backup to the server, and have the server backup to an external hdd, then after 2 weeks or a month (or whatever schedule you see apropriate) replace the external hdd with another one and take the other one with you, and keep rotating the two on said cycle. That way, one drive will always be offsite should something tragic happen.

 

[Kelemvor]

It's good to have onsite and offsite backups. If you do end up dropping mozy, Have all the machines backup to the server, and have the server backup to an external hdd, then after 2 weeks or a month (or whatever schedule you see apropriate) replace the external hdd with another one and take the other one with you, and keep rotating the two on said cycle. That way, one drive will always be offsite should something tragic happen.

Exactly what I was thinking. I don't know if each PC has it's own copy of Mozy on it now or what. At minimum, if they all back up to the server, the server can back up with Mozy or just something like dropbox or whatever.

I'm liking the WHS idea. I had never really looked into that but it has remote access built in, backups built in, etc so it seems like a really nice tool. Might be a perfect solution.

 

[gmaster456]

Exactly what I was thinking. I don't know if each PC has it's own copy of Mozy on it now or what. At minimum, if they all back up to the server, the server can back up with Mozy or just something like dropbox or whatever.

I'm liking the WHS idea. I had never really looked into that but it has remote access built in, backups built in, etc so it seems like a really nice tool. Might be a perfect solution.

Yeah, it sounds perfect for a small church such as yours. If you need anything, PM me.

 

[lxskllr]

Yeah, but then they're screwed if they run into an OS problem and you're not around to fix it.

Like it or not, your average "Joe Churchgoer" doesn't know UNIX.

Your average person doesn't know much of anything :^D

A Windows server going tits up will likely draw the same blank look as a GNU/Linux server going up would. For a simple file server, anyone technically oriented should be able to figure out either one, whether that's the "geeky kid" in church, or the Geek Squad.

 

[arod]

I would think the whs would be better for you.... and you should be able to get a copy of v1 for practically nothing. I really liked my whs but consolidated my boxes into a single one and didn't need the whs anymore but I was very impressed with how hands off it is.... you will probably want to buy an extra hard drive for the backups.... they are incremental but having complete backups for 4 computers will take some space.

My v1 homeserver ran on an atom chip... so chances are whatever you get will be able to run it..... its basically server 2003 with the backup, drive pooling and other bits.

 

[Kelemvor]

WHS 2011 is only $50 retail from Newegg. Not sure if I can find a non-profit/charity discount or anything. hmm. Looks like it would be running on a lower end P4 at a minimum. Still have to figure out what two of the PCs are.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Yeah, but then they're screwed if they run into an OS problem and you're not around to fix it.

Like it or not, your average "Joe Churchgoer" doesn't know UNIX.

A non-technical user will be screwed in any case if they run into a technical problem they can't solve. In addition, Microsoft's focus on "enterprise-y" features (separation of duties, scalability, automation, etc.) has made their products a lot more complex than they used to be, and getting support from Microsoft or a consultant can be very expensive.

I second the recommendation for Linux. The price is right, and with distros such as ClearOS or Zentyal servicing the small-business server niche, the setup and maintenance of a Linux server doesn't have to be complex or scary.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I just set up a FreeNAS server, on an AMD X4 630, mATX 785G board with six SATA2 ports, and 2x2GB DDR3-1333 RAM, and of course, 4x 1TB HDs.

Went pretty smoothly. Find instructions on the net how to install FreeNAS to a USB flash drive, and boot off of that. Save your SATA ports on the mobo for the array drives.

Can all be managed via a GUI in your web browser, just point it towards the server.

After you initialize the array (I chose a single RAIDZ1 over the four drives), then you can create "DataSets", which amount to root directories, and then you can share out those datasets over CIFS shares that you create.

Btw, remember to "Enable" CIFS in Services, otherwise the server and shares won't show up to the Windows' boxen. I learned that the hard way, after some trial and error.

The only thing that I would be concerned with, is if you plan on using FreeNAS with a P4, you may need to choose UFS formats, and not ZFS. I was surprised to find out that ZFS prefers a MINIMUM of 4GB RAM, and really, more is better. I doubt that you have 4GB of RAM in your P4 rig, and it might not even take that much, even if you could afford it.

 

[Jeff7181]

If file sharing on a budget is all that's needed, do what you're saying and create shares on one of the old computers.

If you want to take this opportunity to bring them into this decade and possibly add some functionality they didn't realize they could benefit from, Windows Home Server, FreeNAS, a NAS appliance or Small Business Server would be my choices, in that order.

 

[Kelemvor]

If file sharing on a budget is all that's needed, do what you're saying and create shares on one of the old computers.

If you want to take this opportunity to bring them into this decade and possibly add some functionality they didn't realize they could benefit from, Windows Home Server, FreeNAS, a NAS appliance or Small Business Server would be my choices, in that order.

Exactly!

Originally it was just for file sharing, but I didn't know about WHS. Now that I do, and see it can do backups, remote desktop, etc, I think that's the way we're going to go.

Can anyone tell me about the Remote Web Access? Is it the same as any other remote desktop? So from my house, I can log into the system,and then remote into my actual desktop just like I remote into something on my network? I couldn't find any actual Demo videos of that to verify that's how it works. I'm sure they'd love that extra functionality.

 

[arod]

Yes it works but requires certain versions of windows (don't remember how xp works but you have to have professional or ultimate with vista/7 because it is the only version that includes rdp server). remote desktop will only work if the actual client pc has rdp server and only works in ie (needs an addin to work).

One thing that I actually found more useful was being able to access files remotely... being able to fetch that document I needed was very useful on the go and when you signin you can enable access to all the whs shares.

 

[Jeff7181]

Exactly!

Originally it was just for file sharing, but I didn't know about WHS. Now that I do, and see it can do backups, remote desktop, etc, I think that's the way we're going to go.

Can anyone tell me about the Remote Web Access? Is it the same as any other remote desktop? So from my house, I can log into the system,and then remote into my actual desktop just like I remote into something on my network? I couldn't find any actual Demo videos of that to verify that's how it works. I'm sure they'd love that extra functionality.

WHS uses IIS and presents a web page. It gives you remote access to files, and has links to start an RDP session to any computer with the WHS client software installed. Works quite well, but I'm not sure how secure it is. I know it uses HTTPS, but I imagine you'll get some login attempts from China if you don't have a firewall to control that sort of stuff. Regardless, if you're going to enable remote access, you'll want to use very strong passwords.

The "Professional" version of Windows 7 will allow you to use RDP, not just Ultimate, but since these are XP, as long as they're the Pro version you'll be fine. Even if they're home, you can still use remote access to access files on the server.

 

[Alyx]

How many files do they have? You could just setup dropbox on each machine to sync shared documents between them all and not have any server at all. It'd also have a web copy of the documents for backup.

 

[Zaap]

I had something of this same 'dilemma' nearly a year ago with my home server setup. There's only two computer users in my house (six computers we use) and so I didn't really need a complicated server setup. I'd been using various flavors of Linux as a server for our household for years, and for the most part this was fine.

But I decided to go with a simple install of Windows 7 Pro- not any server version. It's been nearly a year and I'm more than pleased with the decision. Performance has been top notch. The machine runs for months with no hint of a slowdown in file sharing performance.

In my use I found that a small number of users at any given time in a home or small business isn't going to tax a small file-server running a common desktop OS in the least. It'd be different if there were 10 or 15 people constantly using the server maybe.

I ran various distros of Linux for years, and for the most part it went pretty well. But invariably and randomly after an update or some change to the system, something would break and just plain old refuse to work for no apparent reason. I had ssh ability break on me. Remote desktop broke a few times. Whenever an update to my subsonic server would be released I'd cringe and hold my breath updating it. To Linux's credit, samba file sharing never wavered, even a few times when I had a headless system with so many broken services that it was completely inaccessible EXCEPT through the file shares that still kept right on working.

More times than I ever wanted to (which would be never), I had to retrieve my headless server from the dark recesses of the closet where it lives, hook it up to a monitor, and try and fix whatever had broken. Once or twice it wouldn't actually boot to a desktop, forcing me to reinstall a distro, and then go through the ridiculousness of getting all my data drives to show up again with full permission. (With Windows, any already formatted drive you hook up to an installed system will just become part of the system and fully accessible, which is logical, not treating you like you're a crook requiring permission to use your own hardware and access your data.)

Anyway, a simple Windows box handles all my family's file sharing needs and would definitely work for a small church group like you describe as well. There's simply not much need for anything more 'exotic' unless you like the challenge of it. (Nothing wrong with that, I just simply got bored of 'challenges' that were really more like 'massive time wasters', but that's just me.)

I use LogMeIn to remote administer the computer, and VNC locally. For backups from Windows machines I use Cobain. All free. Also because it's just plain ol' Windows, installing and using other apps for added function is a breeze. Often I'll download large amounts of data with the server rather than tie up another machine, burn discs with it, etc. All the same positives will be the same with XP as well. I'd give it a try before even investing in WHS, and certainly before trying anything else.

 

[Kelemvor]

Thanks for all the great info everyone. I hope to meet with the head person there tomorrow to see what they want. It they just want the ability to share files and nothing more, then I may just recommend Dropbox or a stand alone XP/WIn7 machine. If they do want the backups, remote desktop, etc all in one, then we'll look into WHS since it's only $50.

Time will tell.