Re: hardware for Exchange 2003

Dear Ricky,

now it is clear, in your case i would recommend use 2 Mirror Sets, each set
to host the TL for the 2 SG. i don't recommend creating one Logical Drive
with the 4 Hard Dirves to host your T.L. for best performance.

your current server will work fine. but remember to take backup for exchange
in daily bases or weekly bases in order to commit the T.L files into Exchange
Database and free out the T.L files from the Drive.

i hope that you gain the benefit from my post, if yes, please rate it so
others can get the benefit from it.

please let me know if you need more deep information about how to setup
exchange or to provide you with an Exchange Documentation if i have what you
are looking for.

waiting for your confirmation and satisfaction reply.

Regards

Alaa Al-ankar
Blog: http://ExchGuru.blogspot.com



"Ricky Thang" wrote:

Alaa Al-Ankar,

Thanks for your reply. Yes, I already have an FE and this server is for a
BE.

I'm not using SAN here, it's just a external storage using SCSI connection.
All DataBases will be sitting on this external storage. I don't have any
cluster setup here. I just have 2 harddrives combine together to make it as
one(or mirror or RAID 1) for Transaction Log files and let's call this D:
drive or logical drive. Still with me? Then, I create another logical
drive (call it E drive) using two more harddrives and setup it as Raid1.
Why have two set of transaction logs logical drives? Why not just 1 logical
drive and set it to Raid1 for all your databases? This setup is purely for
performance and redundency purpose. Yes, I can just have 1 logical drive as
Raid1 and this can be used for all databases. What would you recommend? 1
raid1 logical drive(2 harddrives) for all transaction log files or 2 logical
drives(4 harddrives)?

Again, all my mailbox stores are residing on the external storage(MSA30),
all 20 of them and configure all 14 drives as Raid 0+1. Why use all 20
mailbox stores? Because I limit each mailbox store to 50gb.

I have 2000 users and each user has a mailbox size of 500mb. That makes it
1 terabytes, right? I don't plan for further growth.

Let's go back to my previous questions:

Based on your experience do you think this server can handle 2000 users?
What changes do I need to make so this server can perform better?

What would you do in a situation where you have 2000 users and each user has
been assigned to 500mb mailbox size? How would configure your Exchange
server?

Thanks,
Ricky

"Alaa Alian Al-Ankar" <alaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ujmhxQlaGHA.4772@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear Ricky,

i am confused here, are you going to use the hardware mentioned on your
post as Front-End Server or your Back-End Server ? what i understood from
your post is that you already have a Front-End Server in place, am i right
?

i am assuming that the new server which has the mentioned specification is
for Back-End Server.

now, i have the following comments:

1. you have SAN where all your hard disks are in place , right ? and you
will use this SAN to store Exchange Database, then why did you implement
two node exchange cluster ?
2. you mentioned that :
C: 72gb (mirror)
D: 72gb transaction logs (mirror)
E: 72gb transaction logs (mirror)
now, where you will place Exchange Information Store Files ? dont think
to place them on Mirrored Drive, the recommendation to have at least RAID
5 for fault tolerance.

can you tell me exactly how you want to setup your exchange server 2003
under your domain and can you answer my questions in order to help you
getting the right solution.

waiting for your reply.


Regards

Alaa Al-Ankar
Blog: http://exchguru.blogspot.com


where you will place the Exchange Database files (Priv.edb, Public.edb,
and thier .stm files)
"Ricky T" <Ricky T@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:868D81BC-4547-4A97-9859-91A5E24108F3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,

Could someone tell me if the following hardware is sufficient for 2000
OWA
users with mailbox size=500mb. Users won't be using POP3 or IMAP, just
OWA
access

HP Proliant ML370
2 Dual-Core 3ghz CPUs with 4gb ram
it will have the /3gb and userva=3030 in the boot.ini file
HP Smart Array 6404 controller card
ALL SCSI drives running at 15krpm for maximum throughput.
This server has 6 internal drives
C: 72gb (mirror)
D: 72gb transaction logs (mirror)
E: 72gb transaction logs (mirror)

HP Modular Smart Array 30(MSA30) enclosure can hold 14 disks. Configure
as
RAID 0+1 on all 14 x 146gb =1022gb. 2 SGs use drive D transaction logs
and 2
other SGs to use drive E transaction logs

Notice: No plan for growth, there is already a FE server installed for
OWA
access, it's on a single domain with two domain controller and global
catalog
servers.

Is the hardware good enough for that many users?

What areas need improvement or adjustment? What would you recommend to
change?

Thanks very much for your help!

Ricky







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Exchange 2000 Server Very Slow
    ... leak or you are having performance issues with your Disk drives. ... utilities on drives that contain Exchange databases. ... Remove 3rd party software from the server one at a time. ... > That symptom is the exact symptom to a badmail folder issue. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange2000.general)
  • Re: SBS 2000 install problems (need to reinstall from scratch)
    ... They are just simple IDE drives running as dynamic disks ... I am familiar with the Active Directory replication from one server to ... the SBS install will change the AD schema to accomodate Exchange. ... >> Do I need to go into disk management and break the mirror first or just ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • Re: SBS 2003 beginner (update)
    ... I also reckon 7 partitions is WAY TOO MANY. ... * F: for SQL Server ... 2nd mirror: D, F, N, Z ... Exchange and SQL databases around pretty easily. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Advice needed - running Exchange
    ... Exchange, but all the drives are part of an Raid 5 array, and I can't ... MAPILABS) so that I could pick up POP3 mail and leave it on the ISP POP3 ... server, and also schedule pickups better then the stock connector. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Repartition
    ... your server" the day will probably come where you don't have the choice. ... You won't have any problems installing exchange, ... > controller because i've read implement a RAID in the same channel as the ... >> more drives and implement RAID on them. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.setup)