Re: Exchange 2003 clustering
From: Russ Kaufmann (russ_at_exchangemct.nospam.com)
Date: 07/12/04
- Next message: Russ Kaufmann: "Re: Windows 2003 Cluster for File Server"
- Previous message: Ed Martin Jr: "Multiple Node 2003 Cluster"
- In reply to: John: "Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Next in thread: John: "Re: Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Reply: John: "Re: Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:00:20 -0600
"John" <John@4sol.com> wrote in message
news:%23Xz0L5BaEHA.3132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I would like to upgrade to Exhange 2003 before upgrading the AD to 2003 is
> this supported ?
Yes, as long as your DCs are SP3 or higher.
> any issues or will i be missing any features until AD becomes 2003 ?
Linked-value replication
Enhanced management tools
InetOrgPerson-enabled mailboxes
RPC over HTTP support for Outlook 2003
> Do I need Windows 2003 Ent edition or is it just Exchange enterprsie on
> Windows 2003 standard for clustering?
You need both Windows and Exchange Enterprise Editions if you want to use
server clustering.
> What are your thoughts on Active/Active clustering with Exchange 2003?
Don't do it. While it is supported, it is not recommended for a wide variety
of reasons.
> know there limitations of no more than 1500 concurrent users on any one
node
> due to virtual memory issues with Exchange 2000 is this still the case
with
> 2003?
> I think four node 3 active one passive would be cost prohibitive so would
> you recommend active/active or active/passive config?
Se above, do not do active/active if you can get away with using
active/passive.
> Surely the best scenario is to run A/A then when you get near the user
> limitations switch to A/P? (is this easy to do or does it requirea major
> overhaul)
It is easy to do if you plan on going from A/A in a two node to A/A/P in a
three node.
> How does serail ATA compare against SCSI for Exchange DBs and Logs?
SCSI is generally recommended, however, you can use serial ATA and accept a
performance hit.
> How does this work on a SAN .can i configure different arrays or do i
> configure different LUNs ? are different RAID arrays for logs/dbs advised
in
> a SAN environment?
Generally in a SAN environment, you create the different LUNs in the same
SAN. The same architecture on the back end is still recommended. Also, it is
a good idea to turn off write back caching for any transaction log LUNs.
- Next message: Russ Kaufmann: "Re: Windows 2003 Cluster for File Server"
- Previous message: Ed Martin Jr: "Multiple Node 2003 Cluster"
- In reply to: John: "Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Next in thread: John: "Re: Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Reply: John: "Re: Exchange 2003 clustering"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
