Unless you have a small(er) percentage of those 500 users doing webmail, I suspect that a single box would not be sufficient. This probably applies to any web-based dynamic content. Anything static is trivial to serve in quantity. Also, because its dynamic, you can’t particularly make good use of caching.
If you won’t have very many people accessing web stuff, or web-based stuff (php, for example), then a single box is more than sufficient. To provide some perspective, using next-cloud (like owncloud, php/web based file sync), a single user is able to eat several cores with php processes doing file manipulations (copy/move/etc). The bigger the files, the longer they eat cpu. Strongly recommend you do some testing to determine how your use case will behave. > On Sep 21, 2018, at 8:17 PM, Ben Koenig <[email protected]> wrote: > > Nevermind. I just realized that math isn't all that hard. > > I got get myself a cabinet over here: > https://www.portlandcolocation.com/colocation/secure-cabinets/ > > Then I build myself an Epyc server on Newegg (using a fake credit card > number, stay safe) > External wish list link here.... > https://secure.newegg.com/Wishlist/SharedWishlistDetail?ID=dV3bM3iF5ddzy4BEsu17Gg%3d%3d&&cm_mmc=snc-email-_-sr-_-wishlist-dV3bM3iF5ddzy4BEsu17Gg%3d%3d-_-09/21/2018 > > Now I'm in about $4,000 deep. Software is free so I grab a copy of > FreedomBox. > WAIT. Forgot my Hard drives. > > One LSI RAID card and 10 WD NAS drives. 6TB x8 but I bought 2 spares up > front to last my first 2 drive failures :) > > Now I'm at $6,000 for the machine. > - AMD Epyc processor. 32 Cores. > - 64GB DDR4 ram > - RAID array of some sort. I'm not sure which RAID mode is best for this > use case. > > FreedomBox is a free installation. Considering that I'm capable of building > and supporting a Linux-based OS shipped on 3000+ computers in the Portland > area I think I can handle 500 users on a single server. > Montly fee is $249/month. > and a One time setup fee of $149. I can purchase addition network bandwidth > as necessary for a fee. > > I probably went WAY overboard on the hardware. It's just a glorified file > server for me and some friends. I plan on maintaining it myself, because > I'm a DIY linux guy.... But if stuff happens my host offers free remote > hands during business hours :-D > > Am I missing anything for this 500 user self-hosted email/collab/fileshare > server? Is $6k scary enough to send me running back in Google's open arms? > --Ben > > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 4:42 PM Ben Koenig <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Let's assume I'm an aspiring Google IT guy and I'm preparing for an >> interview as a Google System Adminstrator. >> >> If I want to build a server that can handle emails from 800 users (500 >> with some headroom) what would I need? Assume that my internet connection >> is capable. >> >> What kind of CPU do I need to process 800 incoming and outgoing emails in >> a given moment? >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:53 PM Tomas Kuchta <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> When looking at the requirements 200-500 users - I cannot imagine any >>> practically useful scenario without single sign on solution al least >>> across >>> the web services and centralized group/access control. >>> >>> With 200-500 users there would be fair amount of user and access >>> management >>> workload. This needs to be distributed to data owners/managers/leaders. >>> >>> That is beside the already mentioned associated storage, backup, security >>> and disaster recovery management. >>> >>> There are other companies beside G-company providing these kind of >>> services >>> or enterprise level support. Some examples: Kolab, Nextcloud, Collabora, >>> ... >>> >>> Regardless of solution chosen - someone has to manage it full time. Given >>> the number of users - it is critical - hence it needs more than one >>> individual to cover for vacation/sickness/disasters/etc. >>> >>> Just adding to the list of consideration. Do look up the services >>> mentioned >>> above though. They work like G-company, but they are OSS, and the >>> platforms >>> are deployable and manageable by individuals - so the lock-in is not as >>> strong as with proprietary services. >>> >>> Tomas >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018, 7:13 AM Tyrell Jentink <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> It's been several years since I looked into this... Like others have >>> said, >>>> the administrative overhead is substantial, and I ultimately decided >>> that >>>> it was just easier and more reliable (for my needs) to use Google. >>>> >>>> That said... The top product I was looking at at the time was Kolab, >>>> http://kolab.org, and it SEEMS to meet many of your requirements... >>>> >>>> I consider it unlikely that a company of this size would be served by >>> any >>>> single application... If I were setting up Kolab for a client, a good >>>> amount of energy would have to be put into questions like "How do we >>> manage >>>> users?" And "How do we manage storage?" And "How do we manage backups?" >>>> >>>> Like, maybe you will find that managing lots of users pushes you into >>>> needing an LDAP server, possibly with Single Signon. As you add these >>>> "Supporting" services, your security footprint increases, and you may >>> need >>>> additional firewall and intrusion detection software; Maybe these >>> services >>>> should be on "Bastion Servers," individual servers for each service to >>>> increase both performance and security... Maybe you virtualized some. >>>> >>>> Maybe those questions lead to non-Linux answers... Maybe you find >>> managing >>>> the workstations of all those users works best with ActiveDirectory >>> rather >>>> than OpenLDAP; Maybe you find that managing the storage requires >>> something >>>> more robust than LVM on XFS or EXT4... And then is Kolab's file sharing >>>> (WebDAV, if I remember correctly) enough for your users? Adding SMB and >>> NFS >>>> can have unintended complications. >>>> >>>> And all of those questions have to be balanced against the inherent >>> feature >>>> creep that comes from wandering down this road. >>>> >>>> For many companies, the answer is to simply let Someone Else do it... >>>> Often, that Someone Else is Google. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 13:40 logical american <[email protected] >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello again: >>>>> >>>>> Can anyone suggest a linux system server which will successfully do >>> the >>>>> following? >>>>> >>>>> 1. successfully imitate and replace the Google Groups program >>>>> 2. successfully imitate and replace the Google gmail server >>>>> 3. allow Google drive operations or simulate those operations >>>>> >>>>> I am seeking to move a large group of users (200-500) from Google >>> Groups >>>>> and gmail over to a stand-alone server and provide some type of Google >>>>> drive functionality also for them, but at a bare minimum a common area >>>>> to download files must exist so users can store their files. >>>>> >>>>> What would you suggest? >>>>> >>>>> The users are in the public domain. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the input >>>>> >>>>> - Randall >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PLUG mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PLUG mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PLUG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug -- Louis Kowolowski [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Cryptomonkeys: http://www.cryptomonkeys.com/ <http://www.cryptomonkeys.com/> Making life more interesting for people since 1977 _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
