Help needed to rationalise servers

[actech]

We are at the stage where we have a chance to get a couple of new servers. I'm trying to work out what is the best way to allocate our needs. We have approx 130 computers with 300 users.

 

At the moment we have

 

Sun - PDC, apps, file, dhcp, dns, backups, print

Mercury - Exchange, pxe boot, DC

Venus - Intranet & VLE

Mars - ISA & Web filter

 

 

I was thinking about replacing Sun and Mercury with new machines and use the old sun with a couple of extra drives as the backup server (with LTO tape drive attached)

 

Is this a smart way to go? Would a SAN box be a better option? An lastly what sort of specs would everyone recommend?

 

Thanks

Rowan

[kmount]

What specs are the current kit?

[actech]

Current Specs -

 

Sun - IBM x306 Intel P4 3.0 GHz, 1 Gb RAM, 2 x 230 Gb HDD Raid 1

Mercury - P4 1.8MHz??

Venus/Mars - Acer Altos r701 Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz, 2 Gb RAM, 2 73Gb HDD Raid 1

Edited August 30, 2009 by actech

[kmount]

I'm surprised Exchange runs on something that low spec.

 

But yeah, I'd agree with you, I'd retire Mercury, up the spec of Sun + introduce a second 'Sun' server of the same spec which you can rely on for the future.

 

You could then as you say use Sun as it is for back ups.

[kmount]

Oh, just thought, you'd probably want to have a read at the Exchange 2007 requirements as MS don't recommend it going on a DC.

 

Installing Exchange 2007 on Directory Servers

 

For security and performance reasons, we recommend that you install Exchange 2007 only on member servers, and not on Active Directory directory servers. Although installing Exchange 2007 on a directory server is supported, it is strongly discouraged. However, you cannot run DCPromo on a computer running Exchange 2007. After Exchange 2007 is installed, changing its role from a member server to a directory server, or vice versa, is not supported.

 

Exchange 2007 System Requirements: Exchange 2007 Help

[Michael]

As well as retiring Mercury, I would give Sun, Venus and Mars a memory upgrade. ECC memory is much cheaper than it used to be and can deliver a good speed boost.

 

As for Exchange 2007 I agree with above. I would purchase a 64bit server and make it a member server only, then transfer Exchange 2003 (presumably) data to the new Exchange 2007 server, then remove the old server completely.

[actech]

I have had someone tell me I should just transfer the existing exchange to a new box (with StorageCraft) and wait till exchange 2010 next year. Is this worth it? How long would exchange 07 last me for?

[Michael]

Microsoft do have a comprehensive guide(s) on how to migrate from Exchange 2003 to 2007. I know of many Network Managers that have said the migration was relatively straight forward.

 

I personally would still proceed with Exchange 2007 on a new server. Service Pack 2 is due to be released very soon and should make it even more stable and reliable. You can still upgrade to Exchange 2010 (as this'll be 64Bit only too) once it's been out for while.

[steve]

Are you considering virtualisation?

 

I'd look at, in the medium term, replacing all your servers with just 2 that would virtualise all your server roles.

 

Possibly split it into 6 virtual servers -

 

Server 1

PDC

ISA / Webfilter

Intranet / VLE

 

Server 2

BDC

Exchange

Print

 

Splitting onto 2 servers gives you the option of migrating everything to one in an emergency.

 

I'd go with 2Gb per virtual server, plus 2Gb extra - so 8Gb per server.

 

Then its down to storage - given the number of users you have, a SAN might be overkill.

 

About £2500 should get you one sever with 8Gb, a decent Quad-Core Xeon and a few hard drives.

[tarquel]

@Michael:

 

FYI - Download details: Exchange Server 2007 SP2

 

 

Nath.