Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Historical Information Tidbit on Equipment

Expand Messages
  • Ken Keyseear
    Greetings, I just got approved for membership. During the LOTW events of the past couple of months, I read something regarding procurement of new equipment for
    Message 1 of 5 , Jan 23, 2013
      Greetings, I just got approved for membership.
       
      During the LOTW events of the past couple of months, I read something regarding procurement of new equipment for the LOTW involving the "ProLiant" product name. Knowing that IT departments often re-procure the same vendor's products, I did a Google search on "LOTW ProLiant" and received a link to the ARRL Letter Volume 19, Number 30 of August 4, 2000.
       
      One of the bullets under the "In Brief" section has the following information:
       
      HQ information technology upgrade under way: Hot on the heels of ARRL Board approval of up to around $1 million for an information technology upgrade, Information Systems Department personnel were installing new heavy-duty equipment. Ready to go on-line pending development of updated database software are two Compaq Proliant 5500 servers, each containing four Pentium Xeon processors. Each server has 1 GB of memory, four 18.2 GB hard drives, and a 1 Gb network card. The new computer software and hardware not only will enhance the ARRL's e-commerce capabilities but update membership information and accounting systems. It also eventually will enable such services as electronic QSLing, member Web access to DXCC records, nearly real-time updates of DXCC listings, and expanded, detailed contest results. The Board also agreed to provide additional financial support for the popular ARRL E-Mail Forwarding Service.
       
      To me, this looks like the foundation of the LOTW system. There was also some earlier speculation that the LOTW servers also process other HQ functions, and the above appears to confirm this. While I haven't found any other information about equipment upgrades between 2000 and 2013, the equipment specified above is consistent with what was available in 2000. I wonder if this procurement lasted them 13 years?
       
      Ken
      (73 de W4KK)
    • Peter Laws
      ... Nice find. 13 would be pushing it, I think, but you never know. I expect 5-6 years out of a server. Proliants (now HP) are good systems. -- Peter Laws |
      Message 2 of 5 , Jan 23, 2013
        On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Ken Keyseear <w4kk_9@...> wrote:

        > To me, this looks like the foundation of the LOTW system. There was also some earlier speculation that the LOTW servers also process other HQ functions, and the above appears to confirm this. While I haven't found any other information about equipment upgrades between 2000 and 2013, the equipment specified above is consistent with what was available in 2000. I wonder if this procurement lasted them 13 years?

        Nice find. 13 would be pushing it, I think, but you never know. I
        expect 5-6 years out of a server. Proliants (now HP) are good
        systems.


        --
        Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
      • Chuck Milam, N9KY
        ... Running a Microsoft Windows variant OS, true. If this system is running a UNIX-based OS (I ve heard this system runs Linux, yes?), then 10+ years is
        Message 3 of 5 , Jan 23, 2013
          On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Peter Laws <plaws0@...> wrote:

          Nice find. 13 would be pushing it, I think, but you never know. I expect 5-6 years out of a server.

          Running a Microsoft Windows variant OS, true.  If this system is running a UNIX-based OS (I've heard this system runs Linux, yes?), then 10+ years is certainly achievable. 

          --
          Chuck Milam, N9KY
          N9KY@...
        • Peter Laws
          ... OS makes little difference in HW lifespan unless you are trying to keep up, in which case you probably would have more trouble on the MS side. Still,
          Message 4 of 5 , Jan 23, 2013
            On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Chuck Milam, N9KY <n9ky@...> wrote:


            On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Peter Laws <plaws0@...> wrote:

            Nice find. 13 would be pushing it, I think, but you never know. I expect 5-6 years out of a server.

            Running a Microsoft Windows variant OS, true.  If this system is running a UNIX-based OS (I've heard this system runs Linux, yes?), then 10+ years is certainly achievable. 

            OS makes little difference in HW lifespan unless you are trying to keep up, in which case you probably would have more trouble on the MS side.  Still, Server 2008 surely would run on a quad Xeon with a gig of RAM. 


            --
            Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
          • John Myers, KD8MQ
            Message 5 of 5 , Jan 23, 2013
              On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Chuck Milam, N9KY <n9ky@...> wrote:
               

              On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Peter Laws <plaws0@...> wrote:

              Nice find. 13 would be pushing it, I think, but you never know. I expect 5-6 years out of a server.

              Running a Microsoft Windows variant OS, true.  If this system is running a UNIX-based OS (I've heard this system runs Linux, yes?), then 10+ years is certainly achievable. 

              --
              Chuck Milam, N9KY
              N9KY@...


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.