RE: Clustering Exchange 2000
You need only one. It provides poor business value. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hutchins, Mike Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange 2000 I remember seeing all the reasons to not cluster exchange, can someone point me to those please? Thanks! :-) _ 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]
Re: Clustering Exchange 2000
Hello Mike, You can search the archives for this list at: http://www.mail-archive.com/exchange%40ls.swynk.com/ If that link doesn't work, just go to http://www.mail-archive.com and search for 'exchange'. Regards, Allison Am Don, 2003-03-27 um 21.37 schrieb Hutchins, Mike: I remember seeing all the reasons to not cluster exchange, can someone point me to those please? Thanks! :-) _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange 2000
Hi there As a person that has a cluster exchange, let me comment: 1) You cannot run the SRS service on a cluster. 2) Microsoft highly recommends an Active - Passive setup 3) There are extra steps needed to get a front end/ back configuration to work properly 4) The cluster is much more complicated than a regular server. 5) False sense of security. I have had issues where a mailbox store corrupted (1018 error). My cluster didn't save me from that. Trust me, Exchange 2000 is a wonderful product. It is also a complex product. Why would you want to make things even more complicated by throwing this on a cluster server? HTH Russell -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 3:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions I remember seeing all the reasons to not cluster exchange, can someone point me to those please? Thanks! :-) _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
As someone said, the reason people cluster is to get the high availability. Our experience has been good - E2K certainly still has issues but a reboot often fixes it. In the case of a cluster, I can limit the minutes of downtime quite a bit over a reboot. Also, when I have to do maintenance, I can limit the impact to a quick failover. This may not matter in most environments but when you have dollars tied to an SLA, those minutes are seriously worth it - at least it has worked out well for us. If I were building systems in anything other than a service provider situation, I probably wouldn't bother with clusters either. Matt Goodell Mi8 Corporation -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 11:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange If you want maximum uptime, don't cluster. I am convinced that clustering increases downtime. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Callan, Chris Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange To answer your reasons not to 1. Already have hardware. Higher ups, didn't mind spending money. 2. Thinking about N plus 1 3. True 4. No reason why I would want my server to be a Domain Controller 5. No reason why I would want my server to be a Global Catalogue Server 6. Have another machine with the srs, and only need it while 2000 and 5.5 are co-existing. 7. True. The reason my company would like a cluster, to have the most available uptime as possible. So if a server does happen to go down, we wouldn't have much downtime, as if we had to fix a standalone server. -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Oh Boy (Time to get on my soap box)... Reasons not to have an exchange cluster: Clustering is generally expensive Clustering is more complex than two servers Front end\ Back end configurations are more complicated Exchange cluster nodes cannot be domain controllers Exchange cluster nodes cannot be global catalog servers Clusters cannot support the SRS service Clustering will not save you in the event of a hardware failure leading to a -1018 error and corrupting your mailbox store. Reasons to cluster exchange: Looks good on your resume Trust me... I have a cluster. Exchange 2000 is complex enough. Why would you want to introduce a cluster and complicate your environment even more? (Off soap box) HTH Russell Friends don't let friends cluster exchange -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] _ 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] ** Mi8 Powered Applications - Brains for Business ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error
RE: Clustering Exchange
If you want maximum uptime, don't cluster. I am convinced that clustering increases downtime. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Callan, Chris Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange To answer your reasons not to 1. Already have hardware. Higher ups, didn't mind spending money. 2. Thinking about N plus 1 3. True 4. No reason why I would want my server to be a Domain Controller 5. No reason why I would want my server to be a Global Catalogue Server 6. Have another machine with the srs, and only need it while 2000 and 5.5 are co-existing. 7. True. The reason my company would like a cluster, to have the most available uptime as possible. So if a server does happen to go down, we wouldn't have much downtime, as if we had to fix a standalone server. -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Oh Boy (Time to get on my soap box)... Reasons not to have an exchange cluster: Clustering is generally expensive Clustering is more complex than two servers Front end\ Back end configurations are more complicated Exchange cluster nodes cannot be domain controllers Exchange cluster nodes cannot be global catalog servers Clusters cannot support the SRS service Clustering will not save you in the event of a hardware failure leading to a -1018 error and corrupting your mailbox store. Reasons to cluster exchange: Looks good on your resume Trust me... I have a cluster. Exchange 2000 is complex enough. Why would you want to introduce a cluster and complicate your environment even more? (Off soap box) HTH Russell Friends don't let friends cluster exchange -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] _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Don't do it. Been there done it you'll be sorry. Search the archives for cluster. We are moving away from a cluster and using hot spare server and booting off the SAN for redundancy. Brian -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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Insufficient data. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 9:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions 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. _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Oh Boy (Time to get on my soap box)... Reasons not to have an exchange cluster: Clustering is generally expensive Clustering is more complex than two servers Front end\ Back end configurations are more complicated Exchange cluster nodes cannot be domain controllers Exchange cluster nodes cannot be global catalog servers Clusters cannot support the SRS service Clustering will not save you in the event of a hardware failure leading to a -1018 error and corrupting your mailbox store. Reasons to cluster exchange: Looks good on your resume Trust me... I have a cluster. Exchange 2000 is complex enough. Why would you want to introduce a cluster and complicate your environment even more? (Off soap box) HTH Russell Friends don't let friends cluster exchange -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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
To answer your reasons not to 1. Already have hardware. Higher ups, didn't mind spending money. 2. Thinking about N plus 1 3. True 4. No reason why I would want my server to be a Domain Controller 5. No reason why I would want my server to be a Global Catalogue Server 6. Have another machine with the srs, and only need it while 2000 and 5.5 are co-existing. 7. True. The reason my company would like a cluster, to have the most available uptime as possible. So if a server does happen to go down, we wouldn't have much downtime, as if we had to fix a standalone server. -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Oh Boy (Time to get on my soap box)... Reasons not to have an exchange cluster: Clustering is generally expensive Clustering is more complex than two servers Front end\ Back end configurations are more complicated Exchange cluster nodes cannot be domain controllers Exchange cluster nodes cannot be global catalog servers Clusters cannot support the SRS service Clustering will not save you in the event of a hardware failure leading to a -1018 error and corrupting your mailbox store. Reasons to cluster exchange: Looks good on your resume Trust me... I have a cluster. Exchange 2000 is complex enough. Why would you want to introduce a cluster and complicate your environment even more? (Off soap box) HTH Russell Friends don't let friends cluster exchange -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] _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
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]
RE: Clustering Exchange 2000
Change the display name of the 5.5 org before upgrading and their E2K org will reflect the new name. -Original Message- From: Sebnem [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 3:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange 2000 Hi all- I am working with a client who has Exchange 5.5 single server running in their AD. They want to go for Exchange 2000 2-node active/passive clustered environment w/o any downtime. I know that I cannot upgrade an Exchange server to a clustered exchange server. My approach is to install Exchange cluster into the same site and move users from the old Exchange 5.5. Move the bridgehead from the old exchange 5.5 to the new one and get rid of the old one. In that approach do you see any pitfalls? Also if they want to change the organization name, would the same approach work if I install a new organization with the clustered exchange 2000 servers? _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Can you cluster hot tubs? -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Kevin...what exactly are you doing there? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Yes. However it does not provide any protection against DOS (Denial of Soap) attacks. S. -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 2:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Can you cluster hot tubs? -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Kevin...what exactly are you doing there? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
If you do cluster, make sure that you have protection. -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 11:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: Clustering Exchange Can you cluster hot tubs? -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Kevin...what exactly are you doing there? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
What is the real cost of planned downtime? Does it really cost your company anything at all? (Some have suggested that productivity might actually increase when e-mail is down!) Does reducing planned downtime really justify the added cost, a very significant cost, of clustering, especially considering that planned downtime can be taken at times when few users are on the system? It seems to me that clusters for Exchange seldom can be cost-justified. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Exchange Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Hmmm...So everyone likes to cut down clustering. I don't fully agree. I have worked with it tons, both on the 5.5 and 2000 platforms. It is more complex, more things can go wrong, many times 'the clustering part of it' lags behind the other parts of the program, third party products aren't always cluster aware and therefore can cause problems, human error is much more common because people aren't sufficiently trained on it, etc. But, if you educate yourself on the technology, work with 3rd parties that do consider clustering, etc. it is possible to, first and foremost, have less planned downtime. That really is one of clustering's major benefits. You can deploy service packs, etc. on the passive nodes while the active one is still running, and effectively cut a 1/2 hour downtime situation to 2 minutes (if everything goes well ;-) ). Also, if the hardware, OS, or a service, goes South on a system, failovers happen quite gracefully (given you're up to date on service packs) and you will have the service back up faster than if you weren't clustered. I've had systems with 5,000 users on them failover with minimal reports to the customers help desk...it does work. If you're in an environment that has people who know what they're doing, and the decision makers above are willing to spend the money for adding possibly another 9, clustering can help. If you are new to the technology, let others do it - your stand alone server will run just fine and will be easier for you to maintain. If you do go with clustering: Don't do active/active clusters, and don't forget that the single point of failure is your SAN/external disks - clustering won't save you from database corruption or external disk failure. In your situation it certainly sounds like not clustering is the right thing to do. I just wanted to defend the technology a bit, because I feel given the right circumstances, it performs as advertised. 'Hope it helps, Per Farny Senior Network Architect Goliath Networks Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:34 AM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: Clustering Exchange Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Agreed. I am speaking for the few companies that have money to spend, and say, Yes, I am willing to pay for that. It's worth it to me to get the reduced (planned) downtime. Per Farny Senior Network Architect Goliath Networks Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, January 18, 2002 10:59 AM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: Clustering Exchange Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange What is the real cost of planned downtime? Does it really cost your company anything at all? (Some have suggested that productivity might actually increase when e-mail is down!) Does reducing planned downtime really justify the added cost, a very significant cost, of clustering, especially considering that planned downtime can be taken at times when few users are on the system? It seems to me that clusters for Exchange seldom can be cost-justified. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Exchange Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Hmmm...So everyone likes to cut down clustering. I don't fully agree. I have worked with it tons, both on the 5.5 and 2000 platforms. It is more complex, more things can go wrong, many times 'the clustering part of it' lags behind the other parts of the program, third party products aren't always cluster aware and therefore can cause problems, human error is much more common because people aren't sufficiently trained on it, etc. But, if you educate yourself on the technology, work with 3rd parties that do consider clustering, etc. it is possible to, first and foremost, have less planned downtime. That really is one of clustering's major benefits. You can deploy service packs, etc. on the passive nodes while the active one is still running, and effectively cut a 1/2 hour downtime situation to 2 minutes (if everything goes well ;-) ). Also, if the hardware, OS, or a service, goes South on a system, failovers happen quite gracefully (given you're up to date on service packs) and you will have the service back up faster than if you weren't clustered. I've had systems with 5,000 users on them failover with minimal reports to the customers help desk...it does work. If you're in an environment that has people who know what they're doing, and the decision makers above are willing to spend the money for adding possibly another 9, clustering can help. If you are new to the technology, let others do it - your stand alone server will run just fine and will be easier for you to maintain. If you do go with clustering: Don't do active/active clusters, and don't forget that the single point of failure is your SAN/external disks - clustering won't save you from database corruption or external disk failure. In your situation it certainly sounds like not clustering is the right thing to do. I just wanted to defend the technology a bit, because I feel given the right circumstances, it performs as advertised. 'Hope it helps, Per Farny Senior Network Architect Goliath Networks Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:34 AM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: Clustering Exchange Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Pro: You'll have lots of opportunities to tell your supervisor what an eejit they truly are. Con: Everything else about clustering. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Agreed, especially when it's cold outside. But why should I truss you? Into kink, are we? -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 2:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
That is nasty -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Not nasty at all. It is called working from the hot tub. No better place to work from. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tener, Richard Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange That is nasty -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Kevin...what exactly are you doing there? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Figured as much... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Not nasty at all. It is called working from the hot tub. No better place to work from. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tener, Richard Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange That is nasty -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Just got to my cabin from work, Son is in bed sick, he feel sleep on the drive out. I am in the hot tub finishing off a file server I started building this morning at work. Need to get this DFS thingie all setup. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John L. Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Kevin...what exactly are you doing there? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 4:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Working from your hot tub again, Kevin? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange I work on them with most of my body being wet all the time? Infact I am right now.. What is wrong with that --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Do not work on servers while your feet are wet. Trut me. -Original Message- From: Ed Smits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Interesting debate on clustering Exchange. We just put in an Exchange cluster (5.5, sp4, Win2K servers) and I'm slowing getting my feet wet with the whole thing. In was working from home today, reading the debate, when my colleague calls me and says our system just failed over (down time aprox. 1 minute). I terminalled in to the servers and discovered an application error that started the whole thing: Event ID: 12800 Description:Message processing failed because there is not enough available memory (8007000E-F2000200). And this on machines with 4 GB RAM. A check of the KB brings up article Q193782 which informs me that: CAUSE The Internet Mail Service submits a message to the information store, which in turn parses the addresses to get the corresponding display names. It detects the corrupted address and generates MAPI_E_CALL_FAILED, but later this error is overwritten as MAPI_E_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY. The information store logs an Event ID: 12800, and the error is returned to the Internet Mail Service. The Internet Mail Service detects this as a serious error and logs an Event ID: 4182, shutting itself down. Now, I'm not sure why our server was shut down, it is running SP4, and will have to investigate this further, but I must admit that I am glad that my management was willing to cluster the thing if Exchange can do this to itself. Ed Smits Canada _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Now stop it! Damn you Andy, coke coming out my nose just isn't what I wanted to experience today! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA Internet/WAN Specialist 913-339-6700 X194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
My favourite cluster deployment is single-node - Ed Crowley I assume that to be an active cluster. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
William gets me all the time with the coke. Ruined a Keyboard last week. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Now stop it! Damn you Andy, coke coming out my nose just isn't what I wanted to experience today! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA Internet/WAN Specialist 913-339-6700 X194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
-Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 January 2002 17:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Nope you shouldn't. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. The cons are it's a sod to set up, and gains you very little additional functionality or reliability or disaster recovery abilities. The Pros are umm..ah... That you'll know how to setup a cluster after doing it, and it looks good on your resume to people who don't know what a bad idea it is to cluster exchange. -- Robert Moir, MSMVP IT Systems Engineer, Luton Sixth Form College Rome did not create a mighty empire by having management meetings -- This e-mail is intended for the addressee shown. It contains information that is confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons or unauthorized employees of the intended organisations is strictly prohibited. The contents of this email do not necessarily represent the views or policies of Luton Sixth Form College, its employees or students. _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Clustering...I was thinking about doing that w/my new E2K servers, but after everyone talking about suspected problems w/clustering I just bagged it and just bought a high end server that will take care of the servers we have hosting mailboxes. It's more of a problem then what it's worth. What if you drink Pepsi??? Does that ruin keyboards? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange William gets me all the time with the coke. Ruined a Keyboard last week. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Now stop it! Damn you Andy, coke coming out my nose just isn't what I wanted to experience today! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA Internet/WAN Specialist 913-339-6700 X194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
Good to hear you finally gave up on that one.. Now all you have to do it finish the upgrade then all will be well. You might be shot on the spot for dinking Pepsi. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John L. Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Clustering...I was thinking about doing that w/my new E2K servers, but after everyone talking about suspected problems w/clustering I just bagged it and just bought a high end server that will take care of the servers we have hosting mailboxes. It's more of a problem then what it's worth. What if you drink Pepsi??? Does that ruin keyboards? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange William gets me all the time with the coke. Ruined a Keyboard last week. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Now stop it! Damn you Andy, coke coming out my nose just isn't what I wanted to experience today! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA Internet/WAN Specialist 913-339-6700 X194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: Clustering Exchange
How about Mr. Pibb??? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Good to hear you finally gave up on that one.. Now all you have to do it finish the upgrade then all will be well. You might be shot on the spot for dinking Pepsi. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John L. Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Clustering...I was thinking about doing that w/my new E2K servers, but after everyone talking about suspected problems w/clustering I just bagged it and just bought a high end server that will take care of the servers we have hosting mailboxes. It's more of a problem then what it's worth. What if you drink Pepsi??? Does that ruin keyboards? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange William gets me all the time with the coke. Ruined a Keyboard last week. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond He's a Dentist, a Detective, a MindReader, No He is in IT. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Now stop it! Damn you Andy, coke coming out my nose just isn't what I wanted to experience today! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA Internet/WAN Specialist 913-339-6700 X194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ 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
RE: Clustering Exchange
not anymore but if you want me too hahaha oh can I practice on your server first -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange Pro: Con: Tener is thinking of clustering as well. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
You should benchmark your reliability. Work with your vendors to determine exactly what your current configuration will deliver in terms of: - mean time between data loss events Your first supporting table for this statistic should look like a seismic event map so you can project not just the frequency of an event, but the frequency of events of various magnitude. You need a second supporting table for this statistic should list all of the probable causes of data loss events, and their relative probability. - mean time between single server outages You need the same accompanying table showing the projected recovery times, assuming that you project that some outages will be more severe than others. You need the same second supporting table listing causes in order of probability. - mean time between total system outages You need the same accompanying table showing the projected recovery times, assuming that you project that some outages will be more severe than others. You need the same second supporting table listing causes in order of probability. Once you have all of this data in hand, and NOT BEFORE, then you have the data that you need to propose various procedural changes and technical upgrades, and you can project with a high degree of accuracy exactly how much additional reliability you will get for a given investment. After that, it is a simple business decision. Any other approach is simply playing with toys and making wild unsupported guesses. But hey, playing with clustering technology can be fun, even if it does drive down your reliability due to guaranteeing an increase in both system outages and data loss events, both deriving largely from sys admin error rates increasing due to the added complexity. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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]
RE: Clustering Exchange
My theory is that, at least at the current stage of the technology, clustering could actually decrease your reliability. Chris, ask you boss what specific benefits he is expecting to get from clustering. Then we can go from there. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Clustering Exchange You should benchmark your reliability. Work with your vendors to determine exactly what your current configuration will deliver in terms of: - mean time between data loss events Your first supporting table for this statistic should look like a seismic event map so you can project not just the frequency of an event, but the frequency of events of various magnitude. You need a second supporting table for this statistic should list all of the probable causes of data loss events, and their relative probability. - mean time between single server outages You need the same accompanying table showing the projected recovery times, assuming that you project that some outages will be more severe than others. You need the same second supporting table listing causes in order of probability. - mean time between total system outages You need the same accompanying table showing the projected recovery times, assuming that you project that some outages will be more severe than others. You need the same second supporting table listing causes in order of probability. Once you have all of this data in hand, and NOT BEFORE, then you have the data that you need to propose various procedural changes and technical upgrades, and you can project with a high degree of accuracy exactly how much additional reliability you will get for a given investment. After that, it is a simple business decision. Any other approach is simply playing with toys and making wild unsupported guesses. But hey, playing with clustering technology can be fun, even if it does drive down your reliability due to guaranteeing an increase in both system outages and data loss events, both deriving largely from sys admin error rates increasing due to the added complexity. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering Exchange My immediate supervisor mentioned that when we finally get new Exchange Servers that we should have them clustered. Now I have never clustered servers before and wouldn't know how to start, but I just wanted to get everyone's opinions on the subject to begin with. How hard is it to do, and how is it to maintain. What are the pro's and con's. Any help would be appreciated. _ 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]
RE: Clustering exchange 5.5
Don't bother. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Trevor Wagnitz Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Clustering exchange 5.5 I am doing some research on clustering my Exchange environment. Does anyone have any good advice or recommendations about where I can get information. Thanks _ 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]
