Re: Primary vs Secondary
- From: "Cathy Moya [MS]" <camoya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 07:14:49 -0700
I personally would tend to go with a primary site unless I have a good
reason not to. Having to buy another copy of SMS constitutes a good reason
not to, as does not buying SQL. Primaries are more flexible. With reorgs and
restructuring the norm, I can change my hierarchy any time if I use
primaries. With remote technology being what it is, it's pretty easy to
manage a primary site even if no one is physically there. You have to do
more tweaking to backup a secondary; it's easier with a primary to click on
the backup task.300-500 clients is still pretty small, so that wouldn't
factor in much. If I was concerned about bandwidth I would consider a proxy
management point.
That's just my personal opinion, not an official Microsoft statement. :-)
--
Cathy Moya, CISSP, MCSE: Security
Technical Writer, Windows Enterprise Management Division User Assistance
Check out the SMS Technical FAQ:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sms/sms2003/techfaq/default.mspx
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties and confers no rights.
"my_key" <mykey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8049BFDD-59FF-48BD-966F-E4BF1560E345@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Whats the answer to my question.
Aside from the sql and server license.
If you had the option of putting a primary or secondary at a site of 3 to
5 hundred clients.
The site is rsponsible for providing services that can mean the
difference. between life or death.
What would be your choice and why?
"Cathy Moya [MS]" wrote:
The next version of SMS definitely WILL support secondary sites. They are
NOT a thing of the past. Consider this official.
--
Cathy Moya, CISSP, MCSE: Security
Technical Writer, Windows Enterprise Management Division User Assistance
Check out the SMS Technical FAQ:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sms/sms2003/techfaq/default.mspx
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties and confers no rights.
"Michel-Vincent" <MichelVincent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:74755990-90D4-4D3E-81A8-8FA6B911DF46@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello
Interesting question.
First of all, Advanced Clients cannot be assigned to Secondary Sites.
if
you
use them, you might have to set up a Proxy management Point to your SMS
architecture. This brings extra complexity.
Next, Secondary Sites do not need a dedicated SQL db. Primary Sites do.
If
you set up a Primary Site, you need a (dedicated) SQL server.
Finally, it seems that Secondary Sites will not be supported in the
next
sms
version (v4).
Conclusion: Secondary Sites are a thing of the past, a relic from SMS
2.0.
I
highly recommend using Primary Sites everywhere in your hierarchy
unless
you
have an issue with SQL support/licensing.
Hope it helps,
Best regards,
MV
--
Michel-Vincent Leriche
http://mvleriche.spaces.live.com
"my_key" wrote:
If you add the option of putting a primary or secondary at a site of 3
or
5
hundred clients.
The site is rsponsible for providing services that can mean the
difference
between life or death.
What would be the reason for the choice.
.
- References:
- Re: Primary vs Secondary
- From: Cathy Moya [MS]
- Re: Primary vs Secondary
- From: my_key
- Re: Primary vs Secondary
- Prev by Date: Re: Primary vs Secondary
- Next by Date: Inventories or updates when client is powered off?
- Previous by thread: Re: Primary vs Secondary
- Next by thread: Re: Primary vs Secondary
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
