Compaq has done extensive performance testing of Exchange 2000 on their line of Proliant servers...and have published them.
In the Compaq Active Answer "Microsoft Exchange 2000 Performance and Configuration on Compaq ProLiant Servers", they did a comparison test of the 1MB vs. 2MB L2 cache. The result of the test is published in the paper. ftp://ftp.compaq.com/pub/partners/microsoft/infolib/dbappsolutions/13JQ-1000A-WWEN.pdf My personal opinion. A dual PIII 1.8 GHz 1MB L2 is more than enought to handle 1000 users. As others have suggested, concentrate more on buying more RAM...or faster SCSI drives. Concentrate on getting the Transaction logs onto their own RAID1 15Krpm spindle. If you have left over cash...spend it on a RAID 0+1 for the database drive. Regards, Leonard > All, > Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 > hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that > someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB > L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over > the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could > give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if > the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users > I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 > Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive > with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. > Thanks in advance, > Brian _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
