MP 7,1 Possibly upgrading my 2009 Xserve to 2019 Mac Pro RM

[Derek Morton]

Hello all.

I currently run a 2009 Xerve as a file & (Plex) video server. It works fairly well, running 24x7 all year long without any issues. However, last year Plex upgraded their software beyond the 10.11.x I am able to run on my Xserve. The Xserve is also both long in the tooth performance-wise and quite the little energy hog. With the introduction of the 2023 Mac Pro, the 2019 is a more reasonable price, so I am considering picking up a rack mount version to replace my Xserve.

My current Xserve configuration:
2009 Xserve 3,1
10.11.6
2x 2.66 GHz Xeons
96 GB RAM
ATTO - 10Gb Fiber Ethernet PCIe HBA
ATTO - 8Gb (x4) Fibre Channel PCIe HBA
Boot - 300GB Internal Hardware RAID-5 (3x 150GB SAS SSD)
Data - 140TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 5 Array
Transcode - 1TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 0 Array

I am thinking about:
2019 Mac Pro RM
Current OS
1x 3.3GHz, 12-core Xeon
128GB+ RAM
ATTO - 10Gb Fiber Ethernet PCIe HBA
ATTO - 16Gb (x2 or x4) Fibre Channel PCIe HBA
Boot - 500GB Internal Flash Drive
Data - 140TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 5 Array
Transcode - 1TB Internal SATA-III RAID 0 Array

One of my concerns is legacy support. Every once in a while I drag out one of my olde-timey (68040) macs and they can connect just fine to the Xserve... or they could, it has been some time since I tried. I have my doubts about being able to connect to the new Mac Pro. Also, will the new Mac Pro handle forks correctly? or will hte files end up getting corrupted?

Any thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[mattspace]

Hello all.

I currently run a 2009 Xerve as a file & (Plex) video server. It works fairly well, running 24x7 all year long without any issues. However, last year Plex upgraded their software beyond the 10.11.x I am able to run on my Xserve. The Xserve is also both long in the tooth performance-wise and quite the little energy hog. With the introduction of the 2023 Mac Pro, the 2019 is a more reasonable price, so I am considering picking up a rack mount version to replace my Xserve.

My current Xserve configuration:
2009 Xserve 3,1
10.11.6
2x 2.66 GHz Xeons
96 GB RAM
ATTO - 10Gb Fiber Ethernet PCIe HBA
ATTO - 8Gb (x4) Fibre Channel PCIe HBA
Boot - 300GB Internal Hardware RAID-5 (3x 150GB SAS SSD)
Data - 140TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 5 Array
Transcode - 1TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 0 Array

I am thinking about:
2019 Mac Pro RM
Current OS
1x 3.3GHz, 12-core Xeon
128GB+ RAM
ATTO - 10Gb Fiber Ethernet PCIe HBA
ATTO - 16Gb (x2 or x4) Fibre Channel PCIe HBA
Boot - 500GB Internal Flash Drive
Data - 140TB Fibre Channel Hardware RAID 5 Array
Transcode - 1TB Internal SATA-III RAID 0 Array

One of my concerns is legacy support. Every once in a while I drag out one of my olde-timey (68040) macs and they can connect just fine to the Xserve... or they could, it has been some time since I tried. I have my doubts about being able to connect to the new Mac Pro. Also, will the new Mac Pro handle forks correctly? or will hte files end up getting corrupted?

Any thoughts?

Thanks!

is there a reason you need a workstation-based server, vs. something like a Synology NAS - one of the models with an Intel processor so it can do video decoding on-device?

 

[Derek Morton]

I doubt I will be happy with an off the shelf NAS. I say off the shelf, because my current configuration and utilization is essentially a Mac NAS. About two years ago I looked into a NAS solution, specifically the QNAP TES-1885u, since it provided much of what I wanted. In the end, after discussing it with numerous people, weighing the ins and outs, I decided to stick with a Macintosh based solution.

Consider:
- I am (and have been for over 4 decades) heavily invested in the Apple ecosystem. I like just running Screen Sharing and being able to access the server from anywhere to check on things or do maintenance. This is the same method I use to access various computers on my network.

- My data storage is all on SAS drives and replacing all the drives would be cost prohibitive.

- My total (raw) data storage is around .5PB. I maintain a RAID-5 array for regular use, with two RAID-6 backups. While my Plex data is replaceable (with many, many hours of work ripping discs), much of the old computer data is not. Any NAS solution would need to provide a backup solution similar to that which I currently utilize.

- Ensuring future access to my old data is very important to me, so any solution should provide multi-fork support and access from my old computers. I may end up needing two solutions, but I hope not.

I would prefer an Apple server based solution and have held out hope Apple would make a new one. However, it looks like that may never happen and my current solution is old. The Xserve works just fine, but there are clearly limits; notable CPU performance and power requirements. The remanufactured 2019 Mac Pro RM is not ideal but, with Apple's apparent direction, it might be my best solution.

 

[mattspace]

I doubt I will be happy with an off the shelf NAS. I say off the shelf, because my current configuration and utilization is essentially a Mac NAS. About two years ago I looked into a NAS solution, specifically the QNAP TES-1885u, since it provided much of what I wanted. In the end, after discussing it with numerous people, weighing the ins and outs, I decided to stick with a Macintosh based solution.

Consider:
- I am (and have been for over 4 decades) heavily invested in the Apple ecosystem. I like just running Screen Sharing and being able to access the server from anywhere to check on things or do maintenance. This is the same method I use to access various computers on my network.

im in much the same, albeit smaller boat. I’m currently using multiple Mac minis via ARD with an 8 drive JBOD as a NAS.

BUT I’m looking to move to a Synology solution because APFS is a lesser file system for data integrity, when compared to BTRFS, and while being a server and protecting data is Synology’s main business activity, getting out of doing that is Apple’s primary interest.

To be honest, I expect Synology to be a better long term bet for integrating with other Apple technologies as a file server, than a macOS based server.

Apple wants you doing everything via iCloud - that’s the company’s future.

- My data storage is all on SAS drives and replacing all the drives would be cost prohibitive.

There are Synology models that are SAS based, you can buy them unpopulated, and probably drop your drives in.

- My total (raw) data storage is around .5PB. I maintain a RAID-5 array for regular use, with two RAID-6 backups. While my Plex data is replaceable (with many, many hours of work ripping discs), much of the old computer data is not. Any NAS solution would need to provide a backup solution similar to that which I currently utilize.

Again looking at Synology, because that’s what I’ve been researching, but I would bet it would be significantly more reliable as a backup solution than anything on APFS or HFS. Plus, they have some good inherent protections, such as read-only snapshots.

- Ensuring future access to my old data is very important to me, so any solution should provide multi-fork support and access from my old computers. I may end up needing two solutions, but I hope not.

You can plug an HFS formatted external drive into a Synology, and share it over AFP, IIRC, which might provide a solution.

I would prefer an Apple server based solution and have held out hope Apple would make a new one. However, it looks like that may never happen and my current solution is old. The Xserve works just fine, but there are clearly limits; notable CPU performance and power requirements. The remanufactured 2019 Mac Pro RM is not ideal but, with Apple's apparent direction, it might be my best solution.

Apple is never again going to make a server they sell you once, when they could rent you a cloud service, sadly.

 

[Derek Morton]

The price of those Synology SAS units is higher than purchasing the 2019 Mac Pro RM. No thanks.

I have never had any issues with data loss running hardware RAID... or none I have noticed. LOL

You have an interesting perspective though. When I investigated going the Synology / QNAP SAN route two years ago, the general consensus from fellow Plex users was to stick with the methodology I was already using. You are pretty clearly suggesting the SAN route.

I already have a pretty good investment in Infortrend Fibre RAID arrays so taking the SAN approach seems unlikely. If, for example, my server fails, I have a backup (identically configured) Xserve ready to swap in and go, the data is still there because it is external to the server. If I lose the RAID array, I have two spares, ready to go. More, the Infortrend arrays allow me to pull drives from one controller and stick them in another controller and I am off to the races. The RAID formatting includes configuration information allowing drives to be moved between physical systems, you don't need to get the drives in the right order, and it can be a different model controller. Really quite a fantastic system.

As appealing as SANs seem to be, I am either going to stick with my current setup (although I have considered trying to upgrade my servers to accept 5600 series processors and then moving to a newer OS), or upgrading to the Mac Pro RM.

Thank you for your suggestions.

 

[mattspace]

As appealing as SANs seem to be, I am either going to stick with my current setup (although I have considered trying to upgrade my servers to accept 5600 series processors and then moving to a newer OS), or upgrading to the Mac Pro RM.

Thank you for your suggestions.

fair enough, I’m using my Mac Pro to dry my laundry while it’s running, so using it as a 24/7 server, given how low-power plex / file serving can be done by seems a tad perverse, but whatever works

The real limiter is going to be Apples commitment to macOS being a competent server / remote managed system.

 

[Derek Morton]

The 2019 Mac Pro will idle at about half the idle power of the XServe. Most of the power consumption is in the raid array. It too has a low power mode which kicks in after 30 minutes without access.

 

[Muziekschuur]

What would an xserve raid draw if it only needs to power 14 ssd's?

 

[Derek Morton]

While I do have an Apple Xserve RAID, it is not currently in use. I am using an Infortrend 16 drive SAS-FC array. The RAID controller spins the HDDs down when not in use for a period of time (say 30 minutes) which saves a considerable amount of power. However, the RAID controllers and fans are running 24x7 and end up representing a significant portion of the power consumption of the unit (because the drives sit idle most of the time). If I were to change out the HDDs with SSDs, there would be a noticeable reduction in power consumption, but the cost to replace the drives would put me at a 100 year payback... if not more.

 

[Muziekschuur]

Why? A ssd (1 tb) = 50 bux. Pata to sata = 6 bux. At wich point you can allmost disconnect most fans?

So for 700'ish you can move from hdd to ssd? and recoup that money in drop of your electricity bills?

 

[Derek Morton]

I am not using an Xserve RAID, I am using an Xserve connected to an Infortrend external FC RAID array.

I currently use 14TB SAS drives and am looking at upgrading to 22TB drives.

Have you priced SSDs with that storage capacity?

 

[Muziekschuur]

No. That is entrerprise level hardware... That's hardly stuff for a small business or start up.

 

[Derek Morton]

No. That is entrerprise level hardware... That's hardly stuff for a small business or start up.

I do not understand what you are saying... or perhaps you do not understand what I am saying.

 

[Muziekschuur]

Depending on who is paying the bills. Maybe another Xserve, converted to sata disks in jbod modus making sure both xserve receive the data maybe much cheaper. So you then can save on energy.

 

[Muziekschuur]

SAS disks are spinning disks are they not?

 

[Derek Morton]

SAS disks are spinning disks are they not?

SAS in the drive interface, available as HDD and SSD. I use SAS-HDDs in the FC-RAID for the price:capacity value (and improvement in reliability over SATA). I use SAS-SSDs in the boot RAID for performance and reliability.

 

[Derek Morton]

Depending on who is paying the bills. Maybe another Xserve, converted to sata disks in jbod modus making sure both xserve receive the data maybe much cheaper. So you then can save on energy.

Again...
I do not understand what you are saying... or perhaps you do not understand what I am saying.

 

[Muziekschuur]

SAS disks are, I think regular spinning harddisks. Just made more robust. Right? One spinning disk draws 1,5 ampere at spin up. So that is quite the draw with 14 disks spinning up. SSD's do hardly draw any amps. They draw very little current. Once data is on a ssd it usually does not corrupt. The drawback is when it has many writes... So a raid configuration that constantly rewrites data is a way to destroy ssd's.

So to use satadisks just as disks and to have it in two locations is another way to keep data safe.

 

[Regulus67]

SAS disks are SCSI drives with high spin velocity, probably 10k or 15k rpm.

I would recommend the newer Mac Pro 7.1, as a replacement to the xserve.
It is whisper quiet in operation. And you have a lot of options when it comes to upgrading it if you need to.
And it comes with two 10Gb ethernet ports.

I bought one myself this spring. Albeit I don't have the same use case. So I can not comment on how it will function in your particular setup

SAS vs SATA: Which Storage Interface Is Right for You? | HP® Tech Takes

Explore the key differences between SAS and SATA storage interfaces. Learn about performance, reliability, and use cases to choose the right option for your needs.

www.hp.com

edit:
Have you seen Neil Parfitt's videos? He has the rackmounted version

https://www.youtube.com/@NeilParfittMusic/videos

 

[Derek Morton]

SAS disks are SCSI drives with high spin velocity, probably 10k or 15k rpm.

I would recommend the newer Mac Pro 7.1, as a replacement to the xserve.
It is whisper quiet in operation. And you have a lot of options when it comes to upgrading it if you need to.
And it comes with two 10Gb ethernet ports.

I bought one myself this spring. Albeit I don't have the same use case. So I can not comment on how it will function in your particular setup

SAS vs SATA: Which Storage Interface Is Right for You? | HP® Tech Takes

Explore the key differences between SAS and SATA storage interfaces. Learn about performance, reliability, and use cases to choose the right option for your needs.

www.hp.com

edit:
Have you seen Neil Parfitt's videos? He has the rackmounted version

https://www.youtube.com/@NeilParfittMusic/videos

My SAS HDDs are all 3.5" 7200 RPM. I think the only 10K+ SAS drives currently (maybe?) available are 2.5" with relatively small capacity. I also have 2.5" & 3.5" SAS SSDs which I use for boot and scratch (respectively).

I did end up getting a refurbished 2019 MacPro RM. It is nice and should suit my needs, but is no server... and I wish it was. :-(
The system currently has:
- Apple I/O card (although there are no external devices connected)
- ATTO 10GbE Fiber card (my backbone is all fiber)
- ATTO 16Gb Fibre Channel card (to connect external RAID storage)
- AMD Radeon Pro W5500 video card (single slot to free up the second MPX slot)
- Paired 2.5" 480GB SATA-III SSDs in RAID-0 for use as a scratch disk

When I am able to get my hands on a pair of Promise Pegasus R4i units I will have 132TB RAID-50 internally. After this my FC RAID units will exist for backup purposes only.

I glanced at the videos you pointed me to, but his style is not mine and I do everything possible to avoid the YouTube rabbit hole.

 

[Regulus67]

I am sorry if it does not meet your expectation.
It has 64 PCI Express 3.0 lanes. And can fit a ton of RAM. Those are specs one would expect in a server.
So I suppose it must be Apple's OS that is the restriction, preventing it from being able to be a proper server.

And fair enough, if you prefer to avoid YouTube

I do a search a couple of times per month, for good videos on the Mac Pro 7.1. But there has not been any lately.
Quite peculiar in one sense. At first everybody said it is not for you (people like me). And here we are, a few years later.
I purchased mine (second hand) in the last months it was still sold by Apple.
I assume there could be an aftermarket for these Macs, if they were more widely promoted. Showcasing uses for a wider audience, than Apple marketed them to.

I still see Mac Pro 4.1/5.1 on the second hand market for what I consider ridiculous prices.

 

[Derek Morton]

I am sorry if it does not meet your expectation.
It has 64 PCI Express 3.0 lanes. And can fit a ton of RAM. Those are specs one would expect in a server.
So I suppose it must be Apple's OS that is the restriction, preventing it from being able to be a proper server.

And fair enough, if you prefer to avoid YouTube

I do a search a couple of times per month, for good videos on the Mac Pro 7.1. But there has not been any lately.
Quite peculiar in one sense. At first everybody said it is not for you (people like me). And here we are, a few years later.
I purchased mine (second hand) in the last months it was still sold by Apple.
I assume there could be an aftermarket for these Macs, if they were more widely promoted. Showcasing uses for a wider audience, than Apple marketed them to.

I still see Mac Pro 4.1/5.1 on the second hand market for what I consider ridiculous prices.

My 5.1 is still going strong and I use it 2-3 times per week for older programs which were never updated for a new OS.

The 7.1 is a fine computer, but it is a workstation, not a server. If it were a server, it would have dual hot-swap power supplies, hot swap hard drives, SAS support, dual CPUs, et al.

I completely agree on the apparent dearth of second hand information 2019 Mac Pro information. Apart from the original reviews of 4 years ago it is pretty quiet. I was able to get some helpful suggestions from various forums which was quite nice.

 

[Regulus67]

The 7.1 is a fine computer, but it is a workstation, not a server. If it were a server, it would have dual hot-swap power supplies, hot swap hard drives, SAS support, dual CPUs, et al.

I stand corrected. You are absolutely correct. I forgot to consider that. It has been to long since I used a proper server. Good to be reminded 👍

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Some of the new QNAP servers are super beefy.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711920356184011031

And some of the new u.2 drives have 60-256tb per SSD

Solidigm has a 61.44TB SSD Coming this Quarter

Solidigm has a massive new NVMe SSD. Dubbed the Solidigm D5-P5336, the new drive spans U.2, E3.S, and E1.L form factors reaching 61.44TB

www.servethehome.com

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1717251005274837496