Since you are one domain the sizes should
be the same. The GC contains the partial attribute set from all domains in the
forest. Since you only have one domain you don’t have anything additional
added. Also, yes the GC is a subset of all attributes for the domains which the
DC is not a member. So again, since you are a single domain nothing is added.
Also the NTDS.dit contains all naming contexts, Domain, Configuration, Schema…
so within the dit for the DC there will be domain naming contexts for all
domains in the forest. Other than the domain which the DC is representing the DC
only have partial information for all objects in the other domains.
Even though only some of the users are on Exchange
2000, the definition of the user objects come from the schema which define
exchange attributes. There are no values for the attributes but the user
objects have those attributes present (Speaking of mail enabled users).
In a multiple domain forest the GCs will
be larger because they have all of their own info as well as some info from all
other domains…
Hth,
Kevin Sullivan
Sales Engineer
Aelita Software
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Zukerman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003
9:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD
synchronization
Now that's interesting Roger. I
never thought to check it, but at my current client, the ntds.dit file does NOT
change between GCs and DCs. For a directory of roughly 8500 objects we are at
250MB for all domain controllers, whether or not they are a DC. This
environment is a single domain with Exchange 2000 (although only a very small
subset of the users have Exchange - that's the project we're doing).
Also, I've always assumed that the
GC was smaller than the DC because it is merely a subset. A large one, but a
subset nonetheless.
Greenwich Technology Partners
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday,
March 26, 2003 7:30 AM
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] AD synchronization
That's
a tough one. Its going to depend on the number of domains and the number of
objects in each domain.
We're
using an empty root with a single 'production' domain below it, probably 2500
objects in the production domain.
Looking
at two root DCs, one which is and one which isn't a GC, the sizes of NTDS.DIT
are significantly different:
So, roughly
speaking, that's about 50MB for a GC replication of around 2500 objects. Of
course, your mileage will vary quite a bit. So, in my case, a full GC
replication is going to be about 50MB to 12 servers, which my WAN can handle
without issue - most WAN's could probably handle that.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Don Murawski (Lenox)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003
7:02 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD
synchronization
How "big" is
the GC synch compared to the full AD synch?
-----Original
Message-----
From: Marc Zukerman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:29
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD
synchronization
Yes. Any schema modification
requires a full directory synchronization. Since the schema is forest-wide,
this means it affects all whether there is a dedicated forest root or not. In
addition, the first Exchange 2000 system forces a global catalog full
synchronization. When I questioned the Microsoft developer at MEC '99 why it
was necessary to replicate the GC completely, I didn't get a satisfactory
answer as to why. If anyone out there can tell me, I'd love to know why. We all
determined it would be best to handle the forestprep and initial server
installation off hours and from the Schema FSMO for any environment that was
sizeable.
Greenwich Technology Partners
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday,
March 25, 2003 2:09 PM
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] AD synchronization
Does Forest prep cause a
full synchronization?
We have an empty root
domain that contains the schema master.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Marc Zukerman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003
12:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD
synchronization
Even so, I wouldn't chance it. If
you have any corruptions to the schema when it gets updated, it is much more
difficult to deal with that at 2:00pm on a Wednesday. I'd shoot for Friday
night to be safe.
Greenwich Technology Partners
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday,
March 25, 2003 11:57 AM
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] AD synchronization
How big is the AD
implementation and how big are the pipes? I ran forest prep here in the middle
of that day with 30 DC's and 10,000 AD objects not a problem at all. 768 CIR
lines between servers.
-- Kevinm WLKMMAS,
Exchange MVP
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marc Zukerman
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:42
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you have not run forestprep yet,
it will update the schema. This will force a full synchronication of the
directory and global catalog. This may be a concern.
Greenwich Technology Partners
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday,
March 25, 2003 10:42 AM
Subject: [ActiveDir]
AD synchronization
We are bring up one E2k server
this weekend, the exchange group is concerned the AD
synchronization will impact Active Directory to a point that service is
crippled.
What are the
major impacts?
Don L. Murawski
Sr. Network Administrator
![]()
WorldTravel BTI
Phone: (404) 923-9468
Fax: (404) 949-6710
Cell: (678) 549-1264
|
