Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003
From: Steve Stewart (steve_at_nospam.com)
Date: 03/11/04
- Next message: Jim Behning: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Previous message: Jim Behning: "Re: Exclude User from My Documents Redirection?"
- In reply to: James Reather: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Next in thread: Thomas Kroljic: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:16:09 GMT
I agree...I wonder if the pecking order is memory, disk subsystem and
processor or disk subsystem, memory and then processor. If you hada
ton of memory the system wouldn't have to page file so much,but then
again, if you have a super fast disk subsystem, paging would fly. Some
times I have to wake my sbs 2003 running on mirrorred plain ole' WD 40
gig ides..it rumbles around for 30 seconds and then springs to life.
Granted, it's a lot for one ide drive to run SBS 2003. Well, only
after you load e-mail and file AV programs. That's what kills ya!
GroupShield 6 is a hog.
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 10:15:05 +0100, "James Reather"
<james.news@reather.com> wrote:
>
>"Thomas Kroljic" <tkroljic@covad.net> wrote in message
>news:ONor0axBEHA.2828@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>I am interested in purchasing MS Action Pack so I can study and work with
>> SBS 2003
>> at my home office. I've looked at purchasing a Dell PowerEdge server
>> (400SC)
>> but am balking at the $1300+ price tag. I'm curious to see if I can find a
>> better (less expensive) solution, especially since this (SBS 2003) is for
>> my
>> education and private use.
>>
>> What are some thoughts about installing this software on a new/used PC
>> instead of a so called server machine? What about installing it on my
>> existing Dell Inspiron laptop with 30gb HD, 512mb ram, with a Pentium 4
>> 1.6
>> GHz. (I've read where some folks have installed this software along with
>> other operating systems usning Virtual PC or VMWare).
>>
>> I would like to find an inexpensive hardware solution to install SBS 2003
>> on. What are other folks installing this software on for their own
>> education
>> and experience?
>>
>> Any comments or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
>
>IMHO the processor is way less important than the memory. During the beta I
>ran various builds of SBS2003 happily on a fairly lowly "white-box" I built
>for the job: AMD 1700+ processor, 768MB memory, 2x 80GB IDE hard drives -
>the first for the OS, the second for backups and data files... makes it
>easier when you are constantly breaking the OS and having to reinstall ;-)
>
>This server ran just fine for a small home network (I had between 2 and 4
>clients workstations connected). The performance wasn't as bad as you might
>think; at one point I went away on holiday for a few weeks and for some
>reason Exchange fell over and the Information Store service stopped, the
>SMTP service kept on receiving messages... so when I got back there were
> >10000 messages in the incoming queue (I get an awful lot of mail....).
>After I restarted Exchange it chewed through the entire queue in around an
>hour... not bad for a box that cost around $300 to build.
>
>This experience made me think that we often over-spec our customers' SBS
>servers - which is why, for small SBS networks, IMHO I'd recommend an
>entry-level P4 server with 1-2GB of ram for around $1500 rather than a
>dual-Xeon with SCSI RAID5 for $10000+... but YMMV.
>
>James
>
- Next message: Jim Behning: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Previous message: Jim Behning: "Re: Exclude User from My Documents Redirection?"
- In reply to: James Reather: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Next in thread: Thomas Kroljic: "Re: MS Action Pack w/SBS 2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
