We have a G5 Xserve run 10.5 , which we use to provide filing cabinet services , iChat , DNS , software updates , and FTP to 15 end - drug user who are all running OS X ( 10.5 or 10.6 ) . We have two 500 GB mirrored drives for file storehouse , another 500 GB ( connect through an eSATA card ) for archiving , and a 2 TB drive for backups . This has been a good fit for us . But now that Apple has discontinued the Xserve product line , what upgrade path should I follow if I want to future - proof that organization ? I could have upgraded to Xserve 10.7 , but it ’s too later for that .

Providing 15 substance abuser with the service you list is not a grievous workload ; any computer Apple presently relieve oneself could handle it . It ’s really a question of which Mac has the connection and content you postulate .

A Mac mini with OS X Server ( ) would cost you between $ 1000 and $ 1400 . You could then get a Drobo ( ) connection parkway for backup for $ 325 to $ 600 ( depend on capacity and assuming you do n’t get the stand saddle horse ) . You ’d probably need another external backup drive ( put everything on the Drobo would not be a beneficial idea ) , so that ’s another couple hundred Buck . So , all told , going with a Mini would be you around $ 2000 . You ’d also have to give up your eSATA , which the mini does n’t back .

The other choice is a Mac Pro running Mac OS X Server . That would be about $ 1000 more than the mini . But out of the corner , it come with two 1 TB drives ; there ’s a good chance you also could slot both your subsist 500 GB drive and the 2 TB backup ride into the Pro ’s two empty ride bays . If you localise up the built - in drive as a software mirror and partitioned them — say , 200 GB for booting and swap and 800 GB for file storage — you’d redeem blank space , lose no capabilities , and get more room for files . If you want to boom from there , you could utilize one of the Pro ’s PCI slots . You could use eSATA ( though you night need to kick upstairs your card ) , FireWire 800 , iSCSI , or Fibre Channel for that . The Pro also send with more RAM criterion than the mini .

So , give what you ’ve assure me , I ’d go with a Mac Pro with Mac OS X Server . It ’ll be more of a help right out of the corner , and your company will have to develop alotbefore you start overloading it .

— –

I run a small company write company with about six Intel Macs link up to a Mac mini server ( 2009 ) running O go Server 10.6 . When I first fructify up up the mini , I made a essential mistake : I bury to mirror the drives in case one fails . ( The 500 GB on each of the mini ’s two drive would be sufficient for our needs . ) Should I : ( a ) re-create everything off the chief drive , mirror the drive with Disk Utility , and start over again ; ( b ) use the 2nd ride for Time Machine backups ; or ( c ) do something else ?

Both choice are viable , as long as you keep a duo of matter in judgement :

First , RAID is not backup . Mirroring the driveway does n’t leave archiving , and if a big file cabinet is written to one drive , it is in effect pen to the other . mirror and reconstruct your waiter will help with reliability and availability and wo n’t observably slow it down — but you ’ll still need a backup drive . Conversely , if you utilise the second drive for substitute , you ’d now have two single points of failure . You ’ll be able to recuperate from most events , but you wo n’t be able to stash away your backups offsite . If something takes out the intact host , you ’ll lose everything .

So my advice would be to mirror the drives in the Mini Server , to get the reliability and availability you should have . Then get two extraneous drive ( or drive units ) for backup . draw one up and set off plump for up . Every so often , swop in the other drive , and take the first one somewhere that ’s not in or near the function . ( The frequency will depend on how much work you think you’re able to afford to lose . ) That way , if your construction burns down , you ’ll be able-bodied to recover at least some of your data .