Exchange Server Forums
Forums |
Register |
Login |
My Profile |
Inbox |
RSS 
|
My Subscription |
My Forums |
Address Book |
Member List |
Search |
FAQ |
Ticket List |
Log Out
New Server Specs
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
Login  | |
|
New Server Specs - 21.Jan.2010 10:02:58 PM
|
|
|
jayoub1
Posts: 32
Joined: 17.Mar.2009
Status: offline
|
I am the network admin for a company with 60 uers and they all like to send attachments in the email. I need to replace our exchange 2003 server with new and am considering using 2007
What server should i get to handle the job. More specifically how should i configure the raid and how much memory should i get. I usually purchase the ML350 with 6 drives and configure the following
2 mirrored for OS
1 Non raid for Page
3 raid 5 for data
Is this ok for exchange and is it ok to have the database and transaction logs on the same DATA drive or should i consider seperating them
I am mostly a sql admin and know that data and transaction should be seperate, but is exchange just as hard disk I/O intensive
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
RE: New Server Specs - 21.Jan.2010 10:37:07 PM
|
|
|
mark@mvps.org
Posts: 6811
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: offline
|
Hell, you need to go back to the drawing board on this one.
Page file on RAID 0? Loose the page file and blue screen the box? No. Not so much,
3 Disks for data? So, two actual disks for data, i.e. 2x IOPS per disk? You're talking SAS disks, right?
Logs and stores on different pairs/sets of spindles please.
Three pairs of RAID1 please. Split them up in an obvious manner.
_____________________________
Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator
|
|
|
|
|
RE: New Server Specs - 22.Jan.2010 11:45:13 AM
|
|
|
jayoub1
Posts: 32
Joined: 17.Mar.2009
Status: offline
|
Thanks for the help the artical is perfect as i will read more tonight.
Yes, Page file non RAID was how Microsoft recommended it back when Windows 2000 came out and i have been doing it ever since. They stated that a "to increase performance page files should not be on any RAID disks", but your thought is concerning; if that drive dies then i am blue screened. I may move the Page file to the OS drives that are mirrored.
I will look at the microsoft artical before i ask more questions and will reconsider my page file deal.
Thanks for the help.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: New Server Specs - 5.Feb.2010 9:45:53 AM
|
|
|
jayoub1
Posts: 32
Joined: 17.Mar.2009
Status: offline
|
OK, i read the articles and there was lots of useful information. I have considered the following server configurations. Please let me know what you think. I only have 60 users all using outlook and I figure the following:
Server one: $5500.00
12GB RAM and
(2) 146GB SAS mirrored drives for OS and Page (no longer raid 0 page)
(2) 300GB SAS drivers mirrored for the Exchange Databases and tran logs, propabably only 2 storages
(2) 146GB mirrored for the PST Email Archive that is currently about 65 GB used.
Server two: $6800.00
10GB RAM and
(2) 146 mirrored for OS and page
(3) 300 RAID 5 for database and tran logs
(3) 146 Raid 5 for PST Archive
OR
(2) 146 mirrored OS and page
(2) 146 mirrored for Tran logs
(2) 300 mirrored for databases
(2) 146 mirrored for PST archives.
I feel that server two is overkill and may not be worth the extra 1200.00 for just sixty users. Please let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Jeff
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
Printable Version
