Since you're not concerned about reliability, why not get a couple of
big IDE drives?

Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jacob Jeong
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 12:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Server capacity


I think you can still buy external storage from HP/Compaq....  

Jake


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Erick Thompson
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 2:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Server capacity

With RAM prices where they are, I don't think it should be a problem
getting that upgraded.

I'm concerned about storage capacity. I have 7 hot swap bays, and given
the age of the 4.3 drives, I want to make sure that we're very
redundant. To do this, I've decided that we need a hot spare for every
configured drive. If I go with RAID 1 for the swap and logs, I'll need
three disks for that, which only leaves me 4 disks for RAID 5, which,
with a hot spare, gives me about 9 gigs for mailboxes. We do a lot of
publishing, so large files are the norm, and I think 9 gigs will be
burned through pretty quickly. If I was to upgrade to 1 gig of RAM, that
should take care of a lot of the swap performance problems. Will having
the E2k log on a RAID 5 volume make a large difference, or is it more of
a performance tweak?

Thanks,
Erick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Cornetet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 7:54 AM
Subject: RE: Server capacity


> I think you will be OK, but if at all possible, add more RAM. I have 
> run win2k/E2k in 256MB and just logging in and running system 
> administrator thrashes the disk continuously.
>
> The textbook says you should use two of your disks in a mirror for the

> Exchange logs, but with 50 users, I don't think it will make much 
> difference. On the other hand, you should realize the disaster 
> recovery implications of having the logs and store on the same disk.
>
> Also, having your swap on RAID5 is going to make swapping even more 
> painful. More reason to add more memory.
>
> Maybe you should consider using two of your disks in RAID1 for your 
> swap and E2K logs. Use the remainder in RAID5 for everything else.
>
> You might also want to consider running Exchange 5.5 on NT4 - 
> particularly if you can't add more RAM.
>
> Another thing to consider (as others have mentioned) is Linux & POP3. 
> Use Yahoo for your "public folders" and calendars.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 6:15 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Server capacity
>
>
> I know it is well beyond end-of-life, but given our financial 
> constraints, is it useable? I don't have the resources to do a proper 
> stress test to see how response times would be under a ~30-50 user 
> load. If it takes 45 seconds for a user to open their inbox, then I 
> will have a good reason to say that we need something with more 
> muscle. I haven't set up an Exchange server before, so I don't know 
> what kind of load it puts on systems.
>
> Erick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 3:00 PM
> Subject: RE: Server capacity
>
>
> > Even if it was, that machine is well beyond end-of-life.
> >
> > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
> > Tech Consultant
> > hp Services
> > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin 
> > Blackstone
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:05 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Server capacity
> >
> >
> > I don't think E2k or even W2K is recommended on a Ppro system.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:05 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Server capacity
> >
> >
> > I am hoping that I can get some feedback on a server configuration. 
> > I have a Compaq Proliant 6500, dual PPro 200, 256 MB ram, and 7 x 
> > 4.3GB drives in RAID 5 with a hot spare. I want to set this system 
> > up as an Exchange 2000 server for about 30 local users, and another 
> > 20 via OWA.
>
> > The email load will be fairly heavy, and there will be a lot of use 
> > of
>
> > shared folders and calendars.
> >
> > I'm concerned about taking the time to set the server up, get 
> > Exchange
>
> > up and running, only to find that it's running too slowly for the 
> > users to be productive. I know more is better, but this is a 
> > non-profit with a very limited budget, so I want to make sure we 
> > have what we need. Is this server going to be a serious bottleneck?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Erick
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > 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]
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > 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]
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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]



_________________________________________________________________
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]

Reply via email to