Replacing SBS: Advice on choosing new servers

All,

I'm looking for advice on hardware/OS for new servers to replace an SBS
set-up. Servers will need to do the following main tasks:

Exchange (probably 2007)
SQL (probably 2005)
Network file sharing services
DC/DNS/Active Directory etc.


Current Set-up = 2 Servers:

1st server is SBS 2003 Prem 32bit running Exchange 2003 and SQL 2000 as well
as the usual DC/AD/DNS type stuff.
2nd server is 2003 Standard 32bit which has DNS/Active directory set-up and
running as a second DC, as well as being used as a file server for all
network file shares.

User base is between 15-20 XP Pro clients, each using Outlook 2003, file
services and a 3rd party app which is heavy on SQL.



Planned future growth:


Current SQL DB size just under 4gb - expected to double in 3-5 years
Current Exchange DB size just over 4gb - expected to double in 3-5 years

Expected to grow to no more than 30 client PCs in next 3-5 years.




Current problems:


Current main bottle neck is SQL - this is killing the SBS box - mostly CPU,
but also disk and memory usage is very high when heavy SQL transactions are
being processed.

Exchange is used throughout the day and so are file services - but not
heavily and with little impact on performance. When we stop the SQL
services, the servers perform well in all other areas.




Current upgrade plan:

We would like to totally replace the SBS server - it's increasingly
unreliable (some hardware failures as well as some SBS specific gremlins
which we have fixed over the years).

We would like to keep the 2nd server - probably to use solely as a DC/DNS
and file server. As CPU and RAM utilisation on this server are very low, we
are thinking about just upgrading the current 2x disks RAID1 to 4x disks
RAID0+1. This server can then remain as a DC and continue to host network
shared files.


My current thinking is to purchase 2 new servers - 1 for Exchange and 1 for
SQL. Then we can throw the SBS away.


Questions:

a) OS. 2003 R2 is the preferred option for both servers, but should we go 32
or 64 bit? Is there any advantage in waiting for 2008?

b) Disk configurations. For performance, I understand a mirror for logs and
RAID5 for data is best for both SQL and Exchange - is this generally true?

c) Instead of buying two servers, as both Exchange and SQL are essentially
databases, could we purchase a single server with lots of fast disk and
install both 64bit SQL and Exchange on the same box? Will they compete with
each other for resources or could they work in harmony?


Thanks in advance for any comments guys,
Paul.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: So why SBS?
    ... Public folders will be in the next version.. ... The sad part of most of us is that we haven't even tried or practiced a backup/restore and we freak out over a 'single" SBS box when we haven't even tried to restore it from a harddrive. ... Exchange seems to mix its words and titles, the global/generic use of POP and SMTP for just about every Exchange function is dumb, MailEnable understands post office protocol and simple mail transfer protocol in a "meaningfull" way. ... The standard profiles in Server are quite effective assuming you add new users to the correct account in the first place and your note running more than 1 file server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Redundancy design in SBS Domain
    ... But virtualization was not on my radar, and Exchange and SQL need more with each iteration. ... I originally went the SBS route because it was by far the cheapest was to get a server up and running with SQL Server at the time. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Easy to use second 2000 Server for Exchange?
    ... Existing Exchange 2000 server - therefore have the CALs - so no new ones are ... Frank McCallister SBS MVP ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: So why SBS?
    ... Public folders will be in the next version.. ... If SBS isn't for you...that's fine. ... Mailenable is an example of a freeware or pay for extra's, mail server. ... It is infinitly simpler to configure than Exchange once installed. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Email for second domain
    ... The Microsoft Exchange MTA Stacks service is normally disabled on Exchange 2003 Servers on SBS 2003. ... You can safely ignore the MTA warning messages on the SBS 2003 server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)