Re: Hardware Recommendations

Well you are right in SQL being CPU/RAM intensive, but also is very IO intensive, as is Exchange(both depending on how much and type of usage which you didn't explain). You may want to read up on deployment of those two to see what your needs are and what you can afford to use for your disk subsystems. IIS, load up on RAM and get some good CPUS, for disk, the faster the reading the better. Your Domain Controllers should have good cpus, and a good amount of RAM, disks...just make sure you mirror them.

Jason

Richard Perry wrote:
As I said in my original email, I already have about 27 servers, so new server purchases are not in the equation.

Second, I am not asking for specific input regarding my scenario or hardware. I am asking in general what the most important components are for say an IIS server. My understanding is that in IIS, RAM is the most important component. SQL is equally CPU and RAM intense. DNS and DHCP are RAM I believe.

Can someone please confirm this? I need to know the hardware impact for each server role.

"Justin Rich" wrote:


Get a Blade Server :)
you can adjust CPU's, memory, and diskspace for each virtual server.. i have a buddy that works on a very large system with those and LOVES them... if not... a couple of entry level servers will do fine for most of that.. you didnt really tell us the usage... so its hard to say what to buy.. i can run SQL on my desktop machine and server up a handful or users no problem..

really we need to know where you are with usage and where you plan to be in the next 3 years..

"Richard Perry" <RichardPerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:28F814EC-EDF6-41C5-A756-33F1C29333B9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am preparing a plan to perform a Novell Netware to Windows 2003 Active
Directory migration. We currently have about 27 servers of various hardware
specifications.

As I see it, the server roles in the future configuration will be as follows:
1. AD Domain Controllers and Services (DNS, DHCP)
2. File & Print
3. Exchange
4. SQL (2005?)
5. SMS
6. Applications
7. IIS
8. Apache (Blackboard Learning System)
9. Oracle database and application

I am looking for a general recommendation for each role about the most
important aspect of the server configuration. There is a SAN involved with
about 1TB of disk space, and will be dedicated to mostly F&P, SQL, and IIS.
Most servers will have at least 2 hard drives.

My main concern here is based on each role, what component is most critical.
SQL is very CPU and RAM intense, IIS is more RAM intense, etc.

Can anyone offer insight as to what component(s) are most critical to a
server involved in each role? 



.

Relevant Pages

  • FW: Microsoft Security Advisory MS 03-007
    ... am trying to find a vulnerability tester/script and I could test it out ... Department of the Army server that had been compromised and that this ... announcement covers IIS 5.1 but not IIS 6, ... How a Hacker Uses SQL Injection to Steal Your SQL Data! ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)
  • Re: SQL-SERVER 2005 SP2 und Microsoft Dynamics 5.0 (ehem. Navision
    ... Wert ist immer zwischen 84,7 -99,8 akt. ... es geht darum wieviel % der Daten, die der SQL Server wollte bereits in seinem Workspace waren. ... 16 GB 2 GB RAM ...
    (microsoft.public.de.sqlserver)
  • Re: WSUS
    ... Les Connor [SBS MVP] ... Is your server exhibiting significant performance problems, and if so, how ... SQL Server: ... >No wonder SBS brings servers with 4GB of RAM to their knees. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • RE: Confusion on standard security methodologies.
    ... Application will talk to a back-end SQL ... By "back-end," I assume you mean on a different box from IIS? ... If SQL is on a separate box, you won't be able to use NT authentication ... impersonations (meaning that once passed to the IIS server, ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security)
  • RE: MS patch-scanner for Win-NT, 2K, IIS, SQL
    ... MS patch-scanner for Win-NT, 2K, IIS, SQL ... XML file from the following location - mssecure.xml Possible ... and on a NT 4 Server, but the scanner works fine on a W2K Server ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)