• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Another question, which would you do?

T

Tsaico

Platinum Member
One server will be running Windows 2003 Small Buisness server, which will run the FSMO, Global Catalog, WINS, DNS, user profiles/redirected folders, exchange, and sharepoint services. The other server will run Windows Server 2003 Standard, file services, print services, and a SQL database, and DHCP and intranet site.

We have two servers to use,
1. 866 PIII with 1.5 gigs of ram and 70 gigs of total hd space.
2. 2.4 GHZ p4, with 2 gigs of RAM, and 120 gigs of total space.

There are 21 users, with 14 any given moment. What would you guys pick for each server?
 
Id do the SBS serve ron the 2nd machine and the file&print on the 1st machine
--although can you move the 120gb to machine #1?
 
It won't really make a difference. It would be nice if you could move some of the memory from #1 to #2 for caching, but since the boxes are so different I'm sure the memory is too. Personally, I would try to isolate the SQL server as much as possible. It'll be the most affected by other services interfering with it.
 
I think what I will do is put more of the services on the faster machine. I can technically move the drives to the other machines, but since these are on RAID 5, I would have to move all or nothing, otherwise I lose drive space. Also, given the age of the machine, I don't really want those drives in the new machine.

So I think on the old machine, I will put in the SQL, and home folders. Then on the other server, FSMO, DHCP, DNS, WINS, GC, exchange, and roaming profiles plus main shares (about 35 gigs, of misc company files) I might suggest more RAM, but we will see how things go with this configuration.
 
I think what I will do is put more of the services on the faster machine.
Click to expand...

I don't see why. I can't imagine AD, WINS, DNS, DHCP and file sharing take much in the way of CPU power. Exchange and SQL will be the problematic ones and should each get their own server. Barring that, you would have to decide whether Exchange or SQL is the 'more important' or at least more performance critical of the two services and give that service it's own machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top