Prev: How to delete an UPDATE in Progress ALERT?
Next: DNS issue causing "Applying computer setting issue" hang
From: Mike on 6 Oct 2009 13:32
Allen,

Thaks for the reply and advice. I'm only over the 20% threshold because of
somework the last few days - I actually ran out of space twice last week and
had to reboot the machine.
Anyway, what you say makes sense, and yes, I would be doing a migration
(already downloaded the MS doc), not an upgrade. I do not use ISA, so that
is not a problem.

Mike


"AllenM" wrote:

> Doesn't appear you have disk space issues on your C: partition. With 23GB
> total and over 5GB+ free you are over the recommended 20% threshold of free
> disk space. As far as hardware seeing how you are a small business using SBS
> 2003 you can run Exchange and SQL on the same server. Just make sure when
> you upgrade your new hardware needs to support 64-bit and don't be shy on
> the memory. In SBS 2003 4GB is good enough however in SBS 2008 looks like
> 6GB is "bare" minimum and most are opting for 12GB. Make sure you make your
> C: drive partition no less than 60GB but again most are opting to go
> 100-120GB. I would also recommend you do a "migration" to SBS 2008 as
> opposed to an "upgrade" as that is not supported. There is plenty of
> documentation for migrating from SBS 2003 to SBS 2008. Keep in mind unlike
> in SBS 2003 Premium in SBS 2008 there is no ISA so if you are using ISA now
> you will need to implement a hardware firewall device or you can go with ISA
> 2006 on a different piece of hardware running W2K3.
>
>
> "Mike" <Mike(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DEF12690-44AF-44F0-A4FB-B899E9F249A4(a)microsoft.com...
> > Al,
> >
> > Thanks for the reply. I have been considering more memory, but I've also
> > wanted to avoid spending any more money on this machine, but memory isn't
> > that expensive, so I will price it out.
> >
> > Yes, it is the same Mike - and I have freed up some space with cleaning
> > out
> > old log files. Actually my C: drive partition is 23G, of which 10G is
> > the
> > Windows directory, Program Files is about 6G and other folders are about
> > 2G,
> > and I have 5G free at this time. Yesterday I moved my Backup Exec install
> > off the C drive partition, which freed up about 2G itself. Also, my space
> > isn't fluctuating like it had been the last few days, so Backup Exec may
> > have
> > been a culprit.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > "Al Williams" wrote:
> >
> >> Don't forget if you want the "premium version" SQL server you will need a
> >> second server (or go virtual) IIRC.
> >>
> >> As for server speed, given enough RAM always put your money into the disk
> >> array.
> >>
> >> For your current server you could probably bring your performance up a
> >> ton
> >> by upping your current server to 3 or 4G of RAM - 2G is not enough for 35
> >> users.
> >>
> >> Also - if this is same Mike as the thread below with your C: drive
> >> filling
> >> up, you indicated you had a 30GB paritition which is more than enough,
> >> you
> >> just need to move some data and limit your logs (SBS/Windows takes around
> >> 10GB, what is the rest?).
> >>
> >> --
> >> Allan Williams
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Mike wrote:
> >> > Sorry guys, a bit more info. We are currently at 35 active users -
> >> > if I had to guess it might change by 1-2 additions per year. I have
> >> > quotas on users for Exchange,but am still running around 50Gb, and
> >> > our SQL databases are not huge either and the biggest one will go
> >> > away sometime next year.
> >> > I would say if I planned for 10% growth per year, that would be more
> >> > than adequate. We are going through right now and digitizing all of
> >> > our documents, but they are stored on a different server, so that is
> >> > not an issue for the SBS machine.
> >> > My current machine is noticbly slow now, but it is old - HP ML370
> >> > with a six disk array (36Gb 15K drives), split into two partitions
> >> > (one for OS and one for Exchange). It has only 2Gb RAM, and I'm
> >> > running out of disk space on the OS partition (deleting logs to keep
> >> > up and running).
> >> >
> >> > Mike
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Mike" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi folks,
> >> >>
> >> >> I am planning to upgrade our SBS 2003 to SBS 2008 early next year
> >> >> (budget planning begins next week). I have used both Dell PowerEdge
> >> >> products and HP Proliant servers, so I'm not married to either one.
> >> >> Any advice on HW - Dell vs HP? How many drives and in what config?
> >> >> Memory? We will be using both Exchange and SQL Server.
> >> >>
> >> >> Mike
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
From: Mike on 7 Oct 2009 09:48
Charlie,

I'm out on HP's web site now, looking to configure to get an idea of
pricing. A couple of questions - I haven't read enough about SBS 2008 - but
if I buy the Premium version. by your configuration, I will have 6-300Gb SAS
Disks in a RAID 6 config - with a 60-80Gb partition for the parent partition
(is that the OS?), a virtual machine running the - including Exchange, and a
virtual machine for the SQL Server. I put 8Gb of memory toward the SBS
server, and 3Gb toward the SQL - I guess that is all configurable in the SW?

Mike


"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

> Given what else you've described, I'd look at an HP ML330 G6 or ML350 G6.
> (Remember, I have a strong HP bias.<g>)
>
> Somewhere around 12 GB should be enough. You'll be running two hyper-v
> virtual machines on it -- one the SBS 2008 server (8GB), the other your SQL
> server(3GB) , running on the second server that is part of SBS 2008 Premium.
> You'll leave 1GB for the parent partition.
>
> I'd choose the maximum number of SAS disks you can fit in the box (and you
> might want to consider Small Form Factor disks). Upgrade the built in 410
> controller to 512 Mb of cache. 300 GB disks should be more than enough for a
> while, in an overall RAID 6 array. Partition off 60-80 GB for the parent
> partition, and the rest to hold the VHDs for the SBS and second server. I'd
> also suggest that adding an additional dual NIC would be a good idea. This
> will give you a dedicated NIC for each VM, plus one for the host.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http:/msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>
>
> "Mike" <Mike(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:BD7A4D1A-5E98-45CE-9411-E78AC44C4A45(a)microsoft.com...
> > Oh yeah, not that this makes much of a difference, but my company is a
> > non-profit community developement organization, so money is always tight -
> > always looking to get the most machine I can for the least amount of
> > money.
> > That's why my current SBS box is 6 years old.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > "Mike" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> I am planning to upgrade our SBS 2003 to SBS 2008 early next year (budget
> >> planning begins next week). I have used both Dell PowerEdge products and
> >> HP
> >> Proliant servers, so I'm not married to either one.
> >> Any advice on HW - Dell vs HP? How many drives and in what config?
> >> Memory?
> >> We will be using both Exchange and SQL Server.
> >>
> >> Mike
>
>
From: Charlie Russel - MVP on 7 Oct 2009 10:34
"Mike" <Mike(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BB67758F-398D-4C6A-9A00-A81FB1CF7E15(a)microsoft.com...
> Charlie,
>
> I'm out on HP's web site now, looking to configure to get an idea of
> pricing. A couple of questions - I haven't read enough about SBS 2008 -
> but
> if I buy the Premium version. by your configuration, I will have 6-300Gb
> SAS
> Disks in a RAID 6 config - with a 60-80Gb partition for the parent
> partition
> (is that the OS?),
Yes, that will be the system partition for the host OS. Nothing else will go
there, and it's not SBS but simply Server 2k8, so doesn't need to be larger
than that.


> a virtual machine running the - including Exchange, and a
> virtual machine for the SQL Server. I put 8Gb of memory toward the SBS
> server, and 3Gb toward the SQL - I guess that is all configurable in the
> SW?
Yes, the Hyper-V Manager will allow you to configure how much RAM and CPU
you assign to each virtual machine, along with what virtual hard disks you
have assigned to each VM. You should use fixed size VHDs for a production
VM.

If I might suggest, you should consider getting a good SBS 2008 book before
going too much further. The two I would suggest are my own (obviously), or
Eriq Neale's. I cover Hyper-V configuration at some length in mine.

>
> Mike
>
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>
>> Given what else you've described, I'd look at an HP ML330 G6 or ML350 G6.
>> (Remember, I have a strong HP bias.<g>)
>>
>> Somewhere around 12 GB should be enough. You'll be running two hyper-v
>> virtual machines on it -- one the SBS 2008 server (8GB), the other your
>> SQL
>> server(3GB) , running on the second server that is part of SBS 2008
>> Premium.
>> You'll leave 1GB for the parent partition.
>>
>> I'd choose the maximum number of SAS disks you can fit in the box (and
>> you
>> might want to consider Small Form Factor disks). Upgrade the built in 410
>> controller to 512 Mb of cache. 300 GB disks should be more than enough
>> for a
>> while, in an overall RAID 6 array. Partition off 60-80 GB for the parent
>> partition, and the rest to hold the VHDs for the SBS and second server.
>> I'd
>> also suggest that adding an additional dual NIC would be a good idea.
>> This
>> will give you a dedicated NIC for each VM, plus one for the host.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http:/msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>>
>>
>> "Mike" <Mike(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:BD7A4D1A-5E98-45CE-9411-E78AC44C4A45(a)microsoft.com...
>> > Oh yeah, not that this makes much of a difference, but my company is a
>> > non-profit community developement organization, so money is always
>> > tight -
>> > always looking to get the most machine I can for the least amount of
>> > money.
>> > That's why my current SBS box is 6 years old.
>> >
>> > Mike
>> >
>> >
>> > "Mike" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi folks,
>> >>
>> >> I am planning to upgrade our SBS 2003 to SBS 2008 early next year
>> >> (budget
>> >> planning begins next week). I have used both Dell PowerEdge products
>> >> and
>> >> HP
>> >> Proliant servers, so I'm not married to either one.
>> >> Any advice on HW - Dell vs HP? How many drives and in what config?
>> >> Memory?
>> >> We will be using both Exchange and SQL Server.
>> >>
>> >> Mike
>>
>>

From: Al Williams on 7 Oct 2009 13:40
10G for Windows directory seems high (ours is only 5GB). You may want to
check in there to see what is taking the space. One thing it could be is
old "$xxxUninstallxxx$" directories. The old ones (say, more than a year)
can be deleted (or moved if you are unsure) as you are not likely to
uninstall the update after a year or more.

--
Allan Williams




Mike wrote:
> Al,
>
> Thanks for the reply. I have been considering more memory, but I've
> also wanted to avoid spending any more money on this machine, but
> memory isn't that expensive, so I will price it out.
>
> Yes, it is the same Mike - and I have freed up some space with
> cleaning out old log files. Actually my C: drive partition is 23G,
> of which 10G is the Windows directory, Program Files is about 6G and
> other folders are about 2G, and I have 5G free at this time.
> Yesterday I moved my Backup Exec install off the C drive partition,
> which freed up about 2G itself. Also, my space isn't fluctuating
> like it had been the last few days, so Backup Exec may have been a
> culprit.
>
> Mike
>
>
> "Al Williams" wrote:
>
>> Don't forget if you want the "premium version" SQL server you will
>> need a second server (or go virtual) IIRC.
>>
>> As for server speed, given enough RAM always put your money into the
>> disk array.
>>
>> For your current server you could probably bring your performance up
>> a ton by upping your current server to 3 or 4G of RAM - 2G is not
>> enough for 35 users.
>>
>> Also - if this is same Mike as the thread below with your C: drive
>> filling up, you indicated you had a 30GB paritition which is more
>> than enough, you just need to move some data and limit your logs
>> (SBS/Windows takes around 10GB, what is the rest?).
>>
>> --
>> Allan Williams
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike wrote:
>>> Sorry guys, a bit more info. We are currently at 35 active users -
>>> if I had to guess it might change by 1-2 additions per year. I
>>> have quotas on users for Exchange,but am still running around 50Gb,
>>> and our SQL databases are not huge either and the biggest one will
>>> go away sometime next year.
>>> I would say if I planned for 10% growth per year, that would be more
>>> than adequate. We are going through right now and digitizing all of
>>> our documents, but they are stored on a different server, so that is
>>> not an issue for the SBS machine.
>>> My current machine is noticbly slow now, but it is old - HP ML370
>>> with a six disk array (36Gb 15K drives), split into two partitions
>>> (one for OS and one for Exchange). It has only 2Gb RAM, and I'm
>>> running out of disk space on the OS partition (deleting logs to keep
>>> up and running).
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Mike" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> I am planning to upgrade our SBS 2003 to SBS 2008 early next year
>>>> (budget planning begins next week). I have used both Dell
>>>> PowerEdge products and HP Proliant servers, so I'm not married to
>>>> either one. Any advice on HW - Dell vs HP? How many drives and in
>>>> what config? Memory? We will be using both Exchange and SQL Server.
>>>>
>>>> Mike


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: How to delete an UPDATE in Progress ALERT?
Next: DNS issue causing "Applying computer setting issue" hang