NetWare vs. Windows for File and Print clustering
- From: jmulvey123@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 20 Mar 2006 08:22:32 -0800
Hello,
I am looking into the possibility of migrating several large-scale
Novell NetWare clusters to Windows servers. These NetWare clusters
perform File & Print services, and consist of about 5 active nodes
servicing several thousands of users. You might have already guessed
that I have questions regarding scalability:
* Can a Windows-based clustering solution match the ability of these
multiple NetWare clusters? I understand that Windows clustering does
well for high availability, but what about for high throughput? Is
Active/Active/Active/Active something that really works well using
Microsoft clustering for File & Print? Most of Microsoft's stuff talks
about Active/Passive. Any real-world experience out there with
Active/Active/Active....?
* Given the differences in print architectures (print drivers run at
kernel level on Windows), would I be safer splitting off printers from
the clusters? I have about 1000 printers (not all different brands, but
still some diversity of make/model), and I can't imagine loading all
those drivers onto the Windows clusters. Am I missing something?
* If Microsoft Clustering can't handle this level of throughput, what's
the best alternative course of action? Would it be to use DFS and break
up the file tree into multiple smaller (say Active/Passive) clusters?
Thanks,
J
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: NetWare vs. Windows for File and Print clustering
- From: Jan Hugo Prins
- Re: NetWare vs. Windows for File and Print clustering
- From: Russ Kaufmann [MVP]
- Re: NetWare vs. Windows for File and Print clustering
- Prev by Date: A policy if in effect on your computer which prevents you from connecting to this print queue.
- Next by Date: Re: Quorum drive
- Previous by thread: A policy if in effect on your computer which prevents you from connecting to this print queue.
- Next by thread: Re: NetWare vs. Windows for File and Print clustering
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
