None currently but I'm thinking of adding HA with the new system. Thanks for the recommendations folks.
>>> Brian Desmond <[email protected]> 5/3/2010 12:03 PM >>> I’d personally go with the “traditional” way and just have one box with all 900 mailboxes. Do you have any HA requirements? Thanks, Brian Desmond [email protected] c – 312.731.3132 From:Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:02 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange server recommentations You can deploy Exchange 2010 a couple of different ways. The traditional way, with RAID, assumes you will continue to execute regular backups. Since Exchange 2010’s I/O requirements is 90% LESS THAN that of Exchange 2003, it’s arguable whether you need to separate log and database files. For disk recommendations, download the mailbox calculator (you can find links at msexchangeteam.com). The non-traditional way assumes that you replicate your data to a backup server and then to a lagged backup server. So you have just as many COPIES of the data, just in different formats that enhance recoverability. You can easily put 900 users on a single server with all roles; especially if concurrency is very low. Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From:Tom Miller [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:56 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange server recommentations Sorry, I knew I forgot something: currently t1 to each location from HQ. Will be increased 3x once we move to Metro Ethernet. Total mailboxes: 900, 20% have little if any activity Also, does MS still recommend separate RAID configurations for the logs files and database files (at least for HQ servers)? Tom >>> "Michael B. Smith" <[email protected]> 5/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> What’s the total number of mailboxes and what kind of connectivity is available to the field sites? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From:Tom Miller [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:44 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange server recommentations Hi Folks, I currently run a non-Exchange shop. There is talk of moving to Exchange. Fine by me, whatever works... It's been a while since I worked with Exchange last (Exchange 2000). Anyone care to provide some general hardware recommendations for the following: field sites, 10-40 staff per location. HQ site, about 600 staff. I currently split the staff accounts onto two servers. Currently each field site has it's own server, but I might go with XenApp for Outlook, then I wouldn't have to purchase new hardware, since those servers are mostly 32-bit. Our current mail system hardly uses any memory but I'm sure Exchange would use more. Tom 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. 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. 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. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
