Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53

Thread: What hardware does your zimbra system runs on

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    79
    Rep Power
    9

    Default What hardware does your zimbra system runs on

    Hello all,

    My question if for all the zimbra admins out there.

    What type off hardware are you running zimbra on?

    I'm curious because I'd like to know how zimbra scales under load and what kind of beast is required for a trouble free, high performing, usage.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    79
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    All right I'm going to post first.

    I'm planning to run full zimbra on a quad p3 xeon 700 with a raid aray and 1gig of ram. It's an IBM server xSeries 250.

    What do you think? Any one have any experience he or she would like to share on this?

    Right now I'm running a zimbra test server on a p4 1.8Ghz with 512 meg of ram and I find the web UI to be a bit sluggish. Shoulld I expect better performance from my quad cpu server compared to this one?

    What is the most important to be able to get the snapiest possible web UI? Ram? Proc? Disks? NIC?

    Also, to the zimbra team, on what type of hardware does the online demo run? I find it a bit more responsive than my test server even though it is on the internet.

    Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appriciated.

    Thanx!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    4,789
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    The demo runs on:

    Operating System: Red Hat ES 4.0
    Processor: Dual AMD Opteron 244 Processors
    Memory: 2 GB
    Hard Drive: 73 GB SCSI X 6
    RAID: RAID 10
    Chassis: *2U Chassis

    At least a 1GB ram for production boxes. 2GB is even better as we can cache more information. Basically tomcat and mysql will take up most of the RAM. If you have extra it can be used for filesystem cache, so you can never have too much.

    Fast CPU's also help reduce the latency on server responses.

    Fast disks(and lots of them) are key for max message throughput. The rate at which we can put messages on disk and index them is very closely tied to the speed and the number of the disks. More is better.
    Looking for new beta users -> Co-Founder of Acompli. Previously worked at Zimbra (and Yahoo! & VMware) since 2005.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Not live yet

    Server
    IBM eServer x226
    Dual 2.8 Ghz Zeon Procs
    6 GB of RAM
    5ea. 146 GB Ultra 320 10k RPM Drives on a HP 642 Smart Array
    2ea. in Raid 1 for the system and spool partitions
    3ea in RAID 5 for Storage

    We are running a custom edge MTA feeding Zimbra and to ease the transition
    we have set up Openwebmail on the same server. Openwebmail accounts
    pull POP3 from Zimbra and delete the inbox on Zimbra. When I convert a user
    to Zimbra I can use an IMAP client to pull email out of the OWM account an place it in
    Zimbra or if the user just uses basic email we just disable the ability for their OWM
    account to POP and let them have access to both for refrencing old mail. So far in testing
    the performance is terrific but I can't do a very large scale test. I only have 200 users so
    I fully expect to use this server for a Samba file server in the future and probably run our
    CMS intranet site as well. Planning on adding a remote SATA drive array for additional low cost storage.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jml75

    Right now I'm running a zimbra test server on a p4 1.8Ghz with 512 meg of ram and I find the web UI to be a bit sluggish. Shoulld I expect better performance from my quad cpu server compared to this one?

    What is the most important to be able to get the snapiest possible web UI? Ram? Proc? Disks? NIC?



    Thanx!
    I initialy tested Zimbra on a workstation, something like a 1.8 gig Celeron with 512 MB
    of RAM. It worked OK. The biggest thing I will say about UI performance is use Firefox and a machine with a 1 GHz or faster proc. We have tested with IE on a 700 mhz machine, it was useable but not something that will make you popular with the users. In my testing with the Windows workstations it was all processor load. Also you need to train your users to expect about a 4 or 5 second delay the first time you open something, after you have opened the calandar once the next time you come back to it it will be snappy. This is not what i would call a good kiosk client. Possibly the folks at Zimbra could develop a simple html interface for folks that have slow PCs or are on the run a lot, something you could choose at login or via url. I have tested this over a slow dail up connection, it takes the UI about 5 minutes or better to get loaded and start up but once it was going the user expirence is almost the same as on the LAN.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    4,789
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dhallweb
    Possibly the folks at Zimbra could develop a simple html interface for folks that have slow PCs or are on the run a lot, something you could choose at login or via url. I have tested this over a slow dail up connection, it takes the UI about 5 minutes or better to get loaded and start up but once it was going the user expirence is almost the same as on the LAN.
    We are looking at a simple HTML interface which will give an option to users who are on dial-up or lower end PC's. Nothing committed yet but we recognize there is some need/want for this until user's get on modern hardware.
    Looking for new beta users -> Co-Founder of Acompli. Previously worked at Zimbra (and Yahoo! & VMware) since 2005.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinH
    We are looking at a simple HTML interface which will give an option to users who are on dial-up or lower end PC's. Nothing committed yet but we recognize there is some need/want for this until user's get on modern hardware.
    That would be awesome, the folks at altn.com have a setup where if you have the browser that supports the fancy stuff you get that, if you dont you get a more basic html only UI, could not stomach the Windows server and IE ActiveX requirements though. I would be able to move everyone to Zimbra much faster if I had a UI where the user could choose say zmail.domain.com or basicmail.domain.com to select the interface they want based on their need or PC or limited connectivity and still have all the mail in one place. I have solved the problem with Openwebmail but I lose a lot of the security and control Zimbra provides and I have two seperate mail stores. Looking forward to the future with Zimbra and with any luck I will be able to kill the Exchange notions the wheels have. Great product it will go far.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    46
    Rep Power
    9

    Default 200 users ?

    so it seems that the speed of the client doesn't only depend on the server.
    but i am wondering what are the recommendations for a 200 users server?
    I am thinking of a one node server (wish I could have 2 servers and some storage to get the multiserver install going) ?
    Every user will have a max of 100MB and some users (the influencial ones) will require more.

    any suggestions ? maybe a HP or dell model recommendation will be really good .

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    4,789
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    100MB only?!? Storage is cheap. A couple 200 GB SATA drives mirror would give everybody a 1 GB quota

    Something with 2GB RAM and dual AMD/Intel CPU's should be fine.
    Looking for new beta users -> Co-Founder of Acompli. Previously worked at Zimbra (and Yahoo! & VMware) since 2005.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinH
    100MB only?!? Storage is cheap. A couple 200 GB SATA drives mirror would give everybody a 1 GB quota

    Something with 2GB RAM and dual AMD/Intel CPU's should be fine.
    I ran acoss a Storcase unit the other night that can handle 12 SATA drives with an onboard controller providing all levels of RAID and it had a SCSI interface. I priced one out, full of 300gb SATA drives and it came to right about 7000.00 dollars. Gives you storage at less than 2 bucks a gig. Now I just need tapes to be that big.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 10:06 AM
  2. huge log size
    By rmvg in forum Administrators
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-02-2007, 10:39 AM
  3. zimbra-core missing
    By kinaole in forum Developers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-02-2006, 12:59 PM
  4. Unable to start tomcat
    By chanck in forum Administrators
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-11-2006, 01:58 AM
  5. Zimbra Processor Output
    By UltraFlux in forum Installation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-01-2006, 08:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •