SwiftStack Existing Server Repurposing

Did you repurpose existing servers for your initial deployment of this solution? If yes, how did this affect scalability, flexibility and cost savings?

Jim Merritt
Enterprise Architect at a retailer with 501-1,000 employees
Initially, in my test environment, I used some older servers that we had kicking around which we were in the process of retiring. Those particular servers - it sounds silly - really weren't conducive to SwiftStack because they had a lot of features that actually prohibited easy maintenance. You really do want no RAID controllers or anything else. We quickly learned that the least expensive servers were absolutely the best servers to have for SwiftStack. During the first month or so, we used old hardware that we had kicking around.
View full review »
Scientif48eb
Scientific Information Officer at a consultancy with 201-500 employees
We did actually repurpose the controller. The controller didn't need to be physical. It could have been virtual. At the time, our virtual infrastructure was a little overextended. We had a physical system which was capable of hosting the controller side of things. So, we did repurpose hardware for the controller.
View full review »
Chris Gatch
Chief Technology Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
We repurposed existing servers for our initial deployment of this solution. This allowed us to save because we didn't have to buy new hardware for one of our initial deployments. That was a nice feature. We were able to buy because of the wide range of hardware that they support. We're able to buy affordable type of white box hardware (commodity, efficient hardware) that drives our cost down.
View full review »
Engineerd3fd
Engineering Manager at a tech company with 10,001+ employees
We repurposed existing servers for our initial deployment of SwiftStack, then for our expansion, we bought new servers. It was a positive benefit for scalability, flexibility, and cost savings. This was a primary reason that we chose the product. It had a lower cost of entry versus comparable solutions. We could repurpose hardware at a small capacity license, then we were able to incrementally grow, which saved us a lot of money over the years.
View full review »
Sign Up with Email