Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsWindows Server 2003Windows 2000Windows NTSmall Business ServerVirtual ServerExchange ServerIISHost Integration ServerISA ServerSMSWSUSMOMWindows Media ServerSecurityCertification
Related Topics
SQL ServerMS WindowsMS OfficePC HardwareMore Topics ...

Windows Server Forum / Small Business Server / SBS 4.0 & 4.5 / December 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Outgrowing SBS?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Richie - 21 Dec 2004 04:01 GMT
Hi All,

We've got a RAPIDLY growing client, who up until now, has been mercilessly
smashing an old SBS2K server... now I know SBS is supposed to handle up to
50 users no probs, but these guys use EVERYTHING to the MAX.

There are 40 users, with staff growth expected to peak "soon" but shouldn't
exceed 75 bods.. as it is they are really flogging the server with Exchange,
SQL, and basic File server load being the biggest culprits... They also host
an internal Web based SQL driven client database... Lanier document scanning
and management, a Voice-Mail messaging system.

Anyways, we've got a chance for a clean slate.

I'll be proposing several servers each doing their own little thing... but
basically replicating the role of SBS on a more scaleable and up-spec'd
level... this is obviously outside the scope of smallbiz group, but not
finding any good info or resources on basic scoping for such a site.

I guess the thing I'm looking for, is information on which applications can
co-exist best, which ones need the most CPU, or memory or whatever. I get
the feeling SBS does some pretty neat little tricks to get it all living
happily on one box...

Any ideas would be hugely appreciated.

Ta.
Rich.
Richie - 21 Dec 2004 04:39 GMT
Hmm... Reading some more, 75 users.. perhaps build it around an SBS Standard
server?

and Split file storage, SQL off to other boxes... RRAS and hardware firewall
should be sufficient..?

Third box for application serving or use Remote Desktop?

> Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> Ta.
> Rich.
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] - 21 Dec 2004 16:23 GMT
> Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> There are 40 users, with staff growth expected to peak "soon" but
> shouldn't exceed 75 bods..

Are you sure about that? How close are they likely to get? SBS2003 supports
up to 75 users, but if you suspect they will be close to that limit, it
probably isn't the best to migrate to.

> as it is they are really flogging the
> server with Exchange, SQL, and basic File server load being the
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> memory or whatever. I get the feeling SBS does some pretty neat
> little tricks to get it all living happily on one box...

In an ideal world:

Domain controller
Second domain controller (could also be file/print box)
Exchange on member server
SQL on member server

Exchange & SQL are both memory/resource hogs. Dual processors & as much RAM
as you can throw at 'em is a good idea.

Hardware SCSI RAID for all - and don't forget global hot spares.

Much depends on your budget.

> Any ideas would be hugely appreciated.
>
> Ta.
> Rich.
Richie - 23 Dec 2004 10:08 GMT
Awesome Lanwench...

Sounds pretty much about right.

A stand alone domain controller... well, we are in a perfect world as it
happens, so I'll try it on!

Many Thanks

> > Hi All,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> > Ta.
> > Rich.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.