Actually the main reason my organization wants to go clustering is for
hardware redundancy (not just hard disks and power and memory, but if a MoBo
fails, we are still ok). I think it is overkill for a file server. Ideas?
Thoughts?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Morgan, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:58 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clusters - Good or Bad idea?It sort of depends on the apps you want to cluster.Can you give us an idea of what you are looking at, as far as apps go
Joshua Morgan
PH: (864) 250-1350 Ext 133
Fax: (413) 581-4936
[EMAIL PROTECTED]-----Original Message-----
From: England, Christopher M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:49 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clusters - Good or Bad idea?I am looking at buying new servers as well and we are looking into Clustering or any other means of hardware and software redundancy. I am pretty sure Advanced Server does clustering as well as load balancing, and I think new servers can be brought in after the cluster is created. One bad thing about Advanced Server and clustering techniques, from what I understand, is that it is a more advanced setup and would require a higher learning curve and more monitoring and maintenance. Not that that is a concern for any of us, but time is a key element we must look at here as well.I am interested in what people have to say about this technology as well, as it will be one of the major factors when we go to buy our new server machines.Thanks,Chris England-----------------------------------------------------------
Christopher England, MCP
Server Administrator
College Information Technology Office
Indiana University-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:08 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [ActiveDir] Clusters - Good or Bad idea?
Hi All,
I am currently specing out a number of new file and printers servers for our HQ with about 700 users (at the moment). I'm considering using W2K Advanced server to cluster machines. My first questions is, is this a good idea? Can you load balance across servers?
Where I am coming from is I want the users at the site, to be able to connect to the machine(s) with one name using the same disk array. There could be 4 or more servers in the cluster, if one of the servers fails, the users get moved over to one of the working machines. Also, can it load balances itself across the machines. For expandability, if we find we need more storage or disk capacity, we can just add another server to the cluster or more disk to the external device?
Is this possible in a File and Print only environment, or am I living in a dream world?
Thanks for you comments
Jamie Simcox
PC Network Technician
J C Bamford Excavators Ltd
_______________________________________________________________
J. C. Bamford Excavators Ltd.
Registered Office: Rocester, Staffordshire, England. ST14 5JP
Registered No. 561597 England
_______________________________________________________________
The contents of this Email communication are confidential to the addressee.
If you are not the intended recipient you may not disclose or distribute
this communication in any form but should immediately contact the Sender.
The information, images, documents and views expressed in this Email
are personal to the Sender and do not expressly or implicitly represent
official positions and policies of the J C B group of companies ("JCB")
and no authority exists on behalf of JCB to make any agreements,
representations or other binding commitment by means of Email.
