Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Releases New 'Server' Configuration of Mac Pro to Replace Xserve

seek3r said:
In other words, yes the MP is more powerful than the xserve, individually, but *not* the way a machine room usually is deployed.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Mac Pro is not more powerful than the Xserve. The only problem with this last refresh of the Mac Pro in August is that they didn't also refresh the Xserve. For the rest of its life, the Xserve has always had the capacity for the same number of cores and RAM as the Mac Pro.
 
KnightWRX said:
Actually, the Mac Pro is not more powerful than the Xserve. The only problem with this last refresh of the Mac Pro in August is that they didn't also refresh the Xserve. For the rest of its life, the Xserve has always had the capacity for the same number of cores and RAM as the Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

Well, you *could* make the argument for more drive bays (though no hotplug), better internal sensors, and more pci-e slots, which is where I think the OP was headed. OTOH the Xserve can have up to 12 ram slots (96GB at current ram densities) + your comment, so the argument is rather nill anyway.
 
VMs and databases can use huge amounts of RAM

mutantteenager said:
But can the OS or the applications that run on it, really make use of 64GB of RAM?? Apple spin, doesn't make the computer any more productive.:(
Click to expand...

Some applications can - for example many database machines are configured with tons of RAM so that the entire database can be cached in memory. This is much faster than even the fastest SSDs.

Some scientific analysis programs have huge memory footprints.

While it isn't seen as often with OSX, under Windows/Linux/ESX virtual machine hosts need huge amounts of ram (if you want to run 12 virtual machines of 4 GiB each on a twelve core, that's up to 48 GiB even before the hypervisor overhead is included (on the other hand, also before any page-sharing)).

Some large servers on the market can be configured with over 1500 GiB of RAM.
 
seek3r said:
Well, you *could* make the argument for more drive bays (though no hotplug), better internal sensors, and more pci-e slots, which is where I think the OP was headed. OTOH the Xserve can have up to 12 ram slots (96GB at current ram densities) + your comment, so the argument is rather nill anyway.
Click to expand...

More drive bays... internal to the case where you can't get to them. Except in the same space a Mac Pro takes up, I can have an external drive bay with tons more capacity than the Mac Pro can ever hope to achieve. ;)

Seriously, I think we both agree the Mac Pro is not a viable replacement to the Xserve and anyone claiming otherwise has never worked in a datacenter or doing systems admin.
 
Something that hasn't been mentioned is a Mac Pro case redesign. It's only 7 years old.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple offers a slimmer, more rack-mount friendly case in the future. The Mac Pro's case has at least some wasted space anyway leftover from the PowerPC G5 days when massive amounts of cooling was needed.
 
theinstructor said:
Everyone is puzzled by this but let us ask...WHAT does Apple run in their racks at the new N.C. server farm? Hmmm? X-Serve? Well not anymore! And we can bet they aren't using Dell or HP systems so let us speculate that Apple has something else up their sleeve, not just this weak little Mac Pro gap-filler. :D
Click to expand...

Sun an IBM boxes
 
fermat-au said:
People are talking about this making Apple irrelevancy in the corporate world, but Apple has never been big in the corporate world. People don't buy a Mac because they need a server. People buy Mac servers to support Mac desktops. The people this will impact are those who run Macs on the desktop and want/need a Mac server to support their desktops. The two groups that come to mind are education and video editors.

Education both schools and universities is an area where Apple were once dominate, without the Xserve that is one more reason for these institutions to go all Windows on the desktop (or even Linux).

It is my understand that Xserves are often used as media servers with Xsan to support FCP editors.

While the Xserve may not have been a big seller for Apple, the worrying part is that this may be another sign that Apple's attention is shifting away from the high end of the PC market to being be purely a consumer tech company.
Click to expand...

There is a huge difference between not being big and being complete irreverent Apple has made it self complete irreverent and this is going to push a lot of firms that were already thinking about switching from a Mac power to windows power. Lee was talking about how the company he works for has been debating about it and the lost of the xServer might be all it takes to push them over the edge. Killing off the Xserver has just increase the distrust of apple in the business environment. This server thing was done just to please the fanboys but anyone who ran Xserver will call it a slap in the face at best.
 
Apple Xserve RAIDs

Anyone know if you could use the Apple Xserve RAIDs with a Linux or Windows server? My company bought and Xsan with about 40TB of storage about 5 years ago since this was the cheapest solution at the time. It's time to replace the PowerPC Xserves on the front end so they are thinking of moving to Linux or Windows because of the announcement. Is there any way to also keep it as a SAN solution? Sorry, don't know much about SANs.
 
ihadmeavision said:
Anyone know if you could use the Apple Xserve RAIDs with a Linux or Windows server? My company bought and Xsan with about 40TB of storage about 5 years ago since this was the cheapest solution at the time. It's time to replace the PowerPC Xserves on the front end so they are thinking of moving to Linux or Windows because of the announcement. Is there any way to also keep it as a SAN solution? Sorry, don't know much about SANs.
Click to expand...

My group has a few XServe RAIDs that we bought for large file testing over the years. We use them as JBODs for Linux/Windows/Solaris/AIX/HPUX systems. They work OK as FC dumb drives.

You might have problems managing them as RAID arrays, though. I don't if there are O-O-B management tools through the NIC.
________

My recommendation would be to replace them. If they're 5 years old, you're probably on the cusp of frequent drive failures. XServe RAID was discontinued 2½ ago. The people costs of trying to support old, unsupported hardware could be larger over the long term than the costs of buying modern iSCSI or FC gear - let alone the costs of losing data due to drive failures.
________

Just found:

Also, Apple certified Xserve RAID for use with some other vendors' servers, such as those running Windows Server 2003 or Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Due to the cross-platform support available, users do not need a Mac to administer the Xserve RAID. Apple shipped a CD-ROM with the device containing the Xserve RAID Admin Tools, a Java software application that runs on most operating systems — including Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Linux, and Sun Solaris.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xserve_RAID
Click to expand...

I still recommend moving to a supported setup. One thing to be careful of is that it can be risky to use "random" drives on a RAID array.

The RAID controller firmware has been tested with and certified for certain drives. It probably contains workarounds for some bugs in the drive firmware. Non-certified drives may hang, corrupt data or worse. (This is a general issue with RAID controllers, not just Apple's.)
 
Last edited:
I don't get this move by Apple. They are integrating and adding more business-realted features on the iOS devices in order to sell more portable devices to corporations but they are moving away from the back-end side of the business?

Why wouldn't they want to move into the server / workstation side of the business?
 
Apple uses IBM AIX and Solaris mainly

Apples new data centre has below kit as per the job listing:

• Apple says that its “data center environment consists of MacOS X, IBM/AIX, Linux and SUN/Solaris systems.”
• The Maiden facility will have a “heavy emphasis” on high availability technologies, including IBM’s HACMP and HAGEO solutions for high-availability clusters, Veritas Cluster Server, and Oracle’s DataGuard and Real Application Clusters.
• Job candidates are also asked to be familiar with storage systems using IBM, NetApp and Data Domain, and data warehousing systems from Teradata.
• Networking positions require a familiarity with Brocade and Qlogic switches.


FYI the Apple Store and itunesStore run on Oracles Solaris OS and kit






QUOTE=x13gamer;11368250]Any chance this is because all of the Xserves that are going to be produced are destined for apples data center?[/QUOTE]
 
Apple are now just an iPod-lovin' consumer company now. Think of all the brilliant rack servers they've made over the years... There was the Xserve and, er, the Xserve.

Seems the Xserve was a half-hearted attempt to enter the enterprise market. They should have bought Sun when they could have had the chance or some other Unix vendor with a track record if they had even modest ambitions in that area.

I don't think Apple will suffer much from (still) not being a major server vendor.
 
pmz said:
I should clarify that I don't necessarily think macs are anyone's best option when it comes to servers. They just exist for those who want them.

From what's available, the Xserve was not the best choice. This new Mac Pro is a better choice for obvious financial reasons, but not compared to other server options.

So, it's a still a choice, just with one less option. Overall, not a good thing for customers.
Click to expand...

Please stop pretending you understand anything about the enterprise. The price difference between an Xserve and a Mac Pro is completely irrelevant to a company such as mine ("Another tray of FC drives for the SAN? That'll be $40k" "Okay"). An enterprise server cannot have a single PSU. No sane CTO would allow it.

We're listed in the ASX Top 200, have a massive investment in Sun and Dell server equipment and even WE have a few Xserves and Xserve RAIDs.
 
macintrance said:
I have a 5 years old 41 nodes (82 cpu) xserve cluster that I use for scientific number crunching. Setting it up was relatively easy and it requires almost no maintenance. The CPU are hard are work 24/7 all year long and so far only 2 nodes have died (never fixed them, so don't know why). I used to work in a place with a Linux cluster and it required a full time person to maintain it (ok, that was 7 years ago). I love my xserve cluster.:)
Too bad, I guess its time to go back to Linux and hours of RTFM.:(
Click to expand...

I think four or maybe six 12 core Westmere MacPro with decent hyperthreading shouldn't do bad compared to these 41 nodes (G5's I guess), whether you compare speed, power consumption, cost, or space. Five years ago the FPU on the G5 was superior to anything Intel had, but that has changed.

maflynn said:
Apple's foray into the enterprise has failed. I'd even say the idea of Macs making their way into the office is a long shot at best. You lose the data center, you lose the front office. The people who make the decisions on what servers to use, makes the decisions on what desktops to select.
Click to expand...

And I was thinking control of the desktop by IT department was the way of the dinosaur.
 
Last edited:
jaw04005 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple offers a slimmer, more rack-mount friendly case in the future. The Mac Pro's case has at least some wasted space anyway leftover from the PowerPC G5 days when massive amounts of cooling was needed.
Click to expand...

A rack-mountable Mac Pro would be half a loaf, but, better than nothing.
 
dazzer21 said:
Now we know why Apple are doubling the size of their data centre...
Click to expand...
So, just how big a network is Apple building into this data center? I mean, if this data center is supposed to be managing and backing up millions of enterprise MBP's out there :confused:
 
Aix?

hss1 said:
Apples new data centre has below kit as per the job listing:

• Apple says that its “data center environment consists of MacOS X, IBM/AIX, Linux and SUN/Solaris systems.”
• The Maiden facility will have a “heavy emphasis” on high availability technologies, including IBM’s HACMP and HAGEO solutions for high-availability clusters, Veritas Cluster Server, and Oracle’s DataGuard and Real Application Clusters.
• Job candidates are also asked to be familiar with storage systems using IBM, NetApp and Data Domain, and data warehousing systems from Teradata.
• Networking positions require a familiarity with Brocade and Qlogic switches.


FYI the Apple Store and itunes Store run on Oracles Solaris OS and kit
Click to expand...

The other stuff makes sense, but, what does Apple need IBM/AIX has and that one of the versions of Linux can't support?
 
jnpy!$4g3cwk said:
The other stuff makes sense, but, what does Apple need IBM/AIX has and that one of the versions of Linux can't support?
Click to expand...

support that's better than RTFM. i don't use it, but from the day to day stuff i read linux is full of bugs and even features like the file system aren't as rock solid as with Solaris

and AIX probably works on IBM's POwerPC servers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back