I think the general opinion on this list is don't do clusters. I am currently working to implement a cluster and it does add an additional level of difficulty. In my opinion, if you are going to use a cluster, an N+1 senario does give you the cluster technology with less hardware expense. It does seem to an an additional layer of complexity when you are initially setting up the cluster.
Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange Okay, we have been beating our heads around looking for a cluster option that will work for us, obviously Active/Active was shot down, because of the memory fragmentation, even though initially MS told us it could be done, for the meantime we are looking to just go Active/Passive, I was wondering though what the general consensus on going N+1 is. We are going to explore the possibility to go to this, but I wanted to get some opinions on it first. Chris _________________________________________________________________ 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] _________________________________________________________________ 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]
