How 'business critical' is having email? If your 400 users can live while email is down for several hours, clustering would definitely be overkill. As Steven said, it is 'cool' but it complicates a simple install.
IMO, you wouldn't want to cluster your servers AND run multiple processes like email, file sharing and print sharing. Virtualize the load-bandwidth services, and leave the email on a physical server. On 3/26/08, Steven Peck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Clustering also complicates your life but is 'neat' to have on the resume > :) > > Whether it is a business requirement or not really depends on your > business needs and the applications you are running. > > Steven > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 7:42 AM, Russ Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is something we did last year and are still implementing. We ended > up > > getting an iSCSI SAN and I currently have a two node cluster that is > also > > hosting MS virtual servers with all the data sitting in the SAN. This > > worked for us as we also needed to replace quite a bit of our hardware > and I > > was able to shut down quite a few older servers and move them onto two > new > > clustered servers. > > > > Clustering is included with the Enterprise and above version of server > > 2003/2008, but you would need to purchase two server > licenses. Clustering > > requires some type of shared storage. > > > > > > Russ Clark > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: Mike Semon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 8:31 AM > > > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: RE: Cluster, virtual servers, or traditional? > > > > > > > > > > > > You might look at iSCSI or NAS solutions for storage if you do not need > the > > performance of a Fibre Channel SAN. There is a big cost saving and in > the > > right environment they work great. Virtualization such as VMware will be > of > > benefit if you want to consolidate servers. If you have a bunch of > servers > > that run at 10-15 % utilization then it makes sense to virtualize them. > Also > > easy to deploy new servers from templates which saves lots of time. If > you > > have small number of servers which have heavy utilization then stick > with > > traditional hardware. > > > > Mike > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: Tom Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 8:05 AM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Cluster, virtual servers, or traditional? > > > > > > > > > > Hi Folks: > > > > > > > > > > > > Over the next year I'll be replacing/moving around most of my servers > here > > at HQ. Currently I have "traditional" hardware servers. I'm wondering > at > > what point to I need to move, if at all, to clustering/SAN/virtual > servers. > > At my regional sites (all 50 staff or less) the model will remain a > > traditional server hardware. However here at HQ (6 buildings) I am not > so > > sure. I have about 400 staff members here using several servers for > e-mail > > and file and print, as well as the typical variety of utility, web, and > so > > on servers. None of the servers consume a huge amount of disk space for > > files or for e-mail (fairly stringent disk space quotas for e-mail). > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggestions? I'll be moving to Windows 2008, and I thought I read that > you > > can cluster 2 servers without additional licenses. I'm not sure about > SANs, > > since that my be overkill here, and I haven't done anything with > > virtualization yet (other than desktop). > > > > > > > > > > > > Reliability is important, but so is cost. Being a non-profit, I don't > have > > lots of funds for extra hardware unless I can justify it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Comments and suggestions appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom Miller > > Engineer, Information Technology > > Hampton-Newport News Community Services Board > > 757-788-0528 > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including attachments, is > for > > the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and > > privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, > please > > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the > original > > message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
