What are your opinions & What problems may occur

[Ryno]

I have just recently took over a network in a primary school

 

When i started we had 13 servers i have now reduced it down to 9 and i want to reduce it to less than that.

 

Current Set Up:

 

• 1 server is the main domain controller
  
• 1 server is secondary domain controller an WSUS server
  
• 1 server is DNS & DHCP server
  
• 1 server is our exchange server
  
• 1 server is our terminal services server
  
• 1 is our file server
  
• 1 is our old sims server and bsquared server
  
• 1 is our new sims server
  
• 1 is a second file server but was not used so i turned it into a windows deployment server
  

 

My plans are to buy a new server big enough for main domain controller and file server to be on the same server and maybe even the bsquared to be on the same server which just requires a database.

 

most servers are running server 2008 but exchange and dns and dhcp are still running server 2003.

 

Should i update these to server 2008 R2 or may this cause problems?

 

I also want to roll windows 7 out to all my machines what problems may occur when this happens?

 

We already have a few running windows 7 and i have not come across any problems at the minute but i think i may if i roll it out to more.

[FN-GM]

You should virtualise, you could then get it down to about 3 physical servers. If done properly you shouldn't get any issues in upgrading the Server 2008 R2, if you are going Windows 7 i would do it. You shouldnt get any issues with Windows 7 providing you test stuff out. Our deployment went really smooth.

[TheScarfedOne]

Ive done something very similar this year. Upgraded through virtualising. Gone from 6 server to 4 physical - which run 30 between them. So.... increased service provision, but less cost. There is info over on my blog about this, cross posted to the Microsoft schools blog. Its more than you need to do, but the principals are the same.

[mavhc]

Is the DNS and DHCP server actually a rasberry pi, or did someone overspec a lot to rip off the school?

[FN-GM]

Is the DNS and DHCP server actually a rasberry pi, or did someone overspec a lot to rip off the school?

 

I didnt notice that, i would shift them onto the DC's

[Dos_Box]

Moving to the Server 2008 R2 forum.

[synaesthesia]

I can't see a need for more than 2 servers there - performance wise it could all be done on a single decent server (let's face it, if the average primary round here runs the whole lot including SIMS on a CC4 server then you know it'll be a breeze on a vanilla) but splitting them you can keep resiliency and availability.

Then again, what exactly is the TS running? Do you have a batch of thin clients or is it basically a VPN?

[Ryno]

Is the DNS and DHCP server actually a rasberry pi, or did someone overspec a lot to rip off the school?

 

The DNS and DHCP is just an overspec im not to sure why it is even seperate to the DC

 

I can't see a need for more than 2 servers there - performance wise it could all be done on a single decent server (let's face it, if the average primary round here runs the whole lot including SIMS on a CC4 server then you know it'll be a breeze on a vanilla) but splitting them you can keep resiliency and availability.

Then again, what exactly is the TS running? Do you have a batch of thin clients or is it basically a VPN?

 

The TS is just being used as a VPN for teacher to login from home.

 

I am new to the upgrading of servers on my own. I have done it before but along side another technician. Can moving the DNS and DHCP to the DC cause problems?

 

I have heard with windows 7 also that sometimes it can rename all user folders to My documents is this still happening?

[FN-GM]

I have heard with windows 7 also that sometimes it can rename all user folders to My documents is this still happening?

 

It doesnt actually rename them windows explorer is tricked into think thats the name. Its caused by a file called desktop.ini - have a search there are lots of threads about it on here.

[mavhc]

I block .ini files with file screens, although it does cause issues when I move home folders, my script turns off the filters, moves the users, and then turns them on again.

[bart21]

You shouldn't have any issues moving dhcp on to a domain controller. As for DNS, I would make the zone AD intergrated then it can be on both DC's and is easy to manage. That's one less server!

 

Nick

[mavhc]

Plus your WSUS server is only used 3 days a month I guess, so put the deployment stuff on that too. DHCP and DNS on main domain controller.

 

You've yet to say how many users. Then start monitoring performance, see what's actually being used. In the end everyone wants n vm hosts, where n starts at 2 and gets larger if they start using all the resources

[FN-GM]

I block .ini files with file screens, although it does cause issues when I move home folders, my script turns off the filters, moves the users, and then turns them on again.

 

@mavhc Doing this will slow down your logon times as it tries to create the file and times out. When you remove the restriction you will notice login times increase allot. We fell for this and now we removed it login times are down to 10 seconds.

[Ryno]

Thank you guys for all your information. You have helped me alot.

[cscott]

I'd always put DNS on domain controller but never, ever, ever DHCP - had a failed DC once that was also running DHCP, couldn't restore as for operational reasons had o move the FSMO DC roles to our other DC's which meant we had to rebuild DHCP on another server ( which doesn;t sound too bad unless you've got a lot of reservations - as we reserve all printer and phone IP's we had to work our way round 200 printers )

[januttall]

It realy depends on the specification of the machines but i would consider moving dns and your file server on to one or the other of the dc's we have two dc's one has dns and dhcp and the other a file server then a seprate server with wsus and sophos etc. but make shure you dont take to much processing out of the system or at peek loads stuff wont work so make shure the specifications are ok. also by having services spread out you lower the bandwidth needed to each server helping it to cope with higher loads more machines can connect at the same time, subject to CPU ram etc. Edited June 19, 2012 by januttall