gshaw Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 Finally got rid of the nasty creaky old Exchange 2003 server this week and wow what a difference with 2007 Mail is quick and responsive, OWA is class and the whole thing now feels like a usable service rather than a bit of a joke as it was before Just need the free Solarwinds tool to be updated for 2007, which would be ideal for keeping an eye on it over time...
linkazoid Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 We've been using it for the last few months, Just patched ours to SP1 to add the personal distribution lists. Everyone here loves it!! And so do we, no major headaches from it.
kesomir Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 What was wrong with exchange 2003? I use Zimbra, so no experience on it.
imiddleton25 Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 We put our Exchange 2007 servers in last summer hols and it has been rock solid. We moved away after exchange 5.5 and came back to 2007 well worth it.
Slartibartfast Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Have you guys split the roles across at least two servers - client access/hub transport on one and mailbox on the other?
linkazoid Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 We have 3 servers for ours - Edge with forefront - Mailbox and OWA.
gshaw Posted August 14, 2008 Author Posted August 14, 2008 All on one here, was going to CCR cluster it but in the end might be a bit ott for our use at the moment. Gives me 2 spare servers for other uses as well so will see how things go. 2003 was collapsing, server was on it's last legs and with all 64-bit kit here there's no decision needed to go with 2007 Linkazone: how do you find ForeFront, is it any good? We've got a Sophos PureMessage license so use that on the sever instead of the Edge Role, new version of PureMessage seems to be a lot better than the old one so far so good
imiddleton25 Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 We went the full option with clustering (downside is cant be on one box) 2 client access servers 2 mailbox servers (Clustered ) 2 hub transport servers ( virtual servers on a different cluster ) It was a bit of a shock having been to Microsoft launch of Exchange 2007 and read lots of blogs to find the major selling point of "It can all go on one box " to be not true in our case. But the upside is it works which always helps
linkazoid Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Dont seem to have any problems with forefront, had a few installation problems but its all sorted now.. It's caught a few viruses and dodgy emails, no outbreaks of anything here.
gshaw Posted August 15, 2008 Author Posted August 15, 2008 We went the full option with clustering (downside is cant be on one box) 2 client access servers 2 mailbox servers (Clustered ) 2 hub transport servers ( virtual servers on a different cluster ) It was a bit of a shock having been to Microsoft launch of Exchange 2007 and read lots of blogs to find the major selling point of "It can all go on one box " to be not true in our case. But the upside is it works which always helps Yeah when I realised you'd need 4 servers minimum for true clustering (2 x hub transport otherwise the mail flow would stop if a lone hub server crashed ) the idea kinda dropped away a bit!
Dos_Box Posted August 15, 2008 Posted August 15, 2008 M$ Are currently dialled into my Exchange 2003 server. All the updates on Tuesday scuppered OWA I can't even put Server 2003 SP2 on it as it has killed it.....twice. I'd love to migrate to 2007.
ZeroHour Posted August 15, 2008 Posted August 15, 2008 We went the full option with clustering (downside is cant be on one box) Thats not actually true. You can virtualize them into a hyper-visor cluster using iscsi. Also vmware/xen can do it too.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now