David,
One thing I'd point out: Don't use "lower performing storage" for the
Content Library, and your package source. This can get hit pretty hard with
large package distributions (eg. WIM files, Office, et al.).
You should also consider this question: Are you planning on using default
schedules for policy refreshes and inventory? This will impact your sizing
for management points.
As for your remote sites, consider avoiding the usage of Secondary Sites, as
long as there is a large enough WAN pipe. If you assume 1,000 users, have
100Mbit pipes (or larger), and don't have aggressive policy refresh and
inventory schedules, then you should be alright with just a Distribution
Point. After all, the vast majority of your network utilization will be
package pull requests.
Cheers,
Trevor Sullivan
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Crown, David T. (DTI)
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 8:33 AM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: [mssms] Sizing Question
I know it being Monday and all, I'm wondering if you find folks wouldn't
mind double checking my sizing. I changed roles with my employer, and the
scale of the configmgr environment I'm used to supporting has grown quite a
bit.
I'm looking to migrate about 15K, scaling to a potential of 40K, clients
from a 2007 and a 2012 (with a CAS for political reasons) to a single 2012
site. The plan is to use a box with 16 cores and 48GB (the plan is get it to
96) of ram with SQL on box and no other roles. For the backing disks, I was
looking at three Fibre Channel Luns. One 300~500 gig disk on a high
performance lun that can sustain 20K IOPS for the site directory and sql,
one 2TB lun on some lower preforming storage for package source and the
content library, and a third lun in the same lower performance tier (~1TB)
for my backups.
I plan on using two to four MP's as vm's behind a load balancer, two
unprotected DP's for failback, and one SUP. As the environment is deployed,
I plan on bringing in protected DP's, and for my larger sites (500 to 1000
users), I plan on sticking a secondary at the site.
So my question is does my proposed environment look like it could support
the number of clients I'll be managing?
