Why do you want to split things?
Our biggest bottle neck & resource hog is Exchange Server. My plan was for our new server to be the PDC, handle Exchange & IIS, etc., and offload the file server work to a PC or NAS device.
#2 - If you go for a Seperate Custom PC - You will need an OS and to connect 25 people, it will need to be a Windows Server Edition due to restrictions built into the DESKTO OS. Now, you could go Linux, but you said you want things simple and that is not simple for a one man solution.
I have the Win2K Server license from our soon-to-be-replaced server. That can handle the 25 users (though the current 5 y/o P4 needs to be replaced).
#3 You also want the system to be as fault tolerant as possible and will need backups. Your Server is most likely a real server with redundant power supplies, a Server Class Raid Controller with excellent redundancy on your drives.
Yes, the new server we're looking at has RAID & redundant power supplies. We have a removable hard drive based backup solution that dovetails with our Disaster Recovery plan. The backups are verified daily and the DR process is tested quarterly.
That being said, I think your company should really look at it's budget and factor in two servers of about equal quality. That way if one server goes down, you still have a secondary domain controller.
My budget for the new server + OS is $4k - $5k, with some room for additional user licensees.
You could also replicate the data from one server to the next.
I currently use an old PC for replication which copies the DB's at 9am, 12, 3 & 6pm.
How much would it cost your company to be down for say 1-day while techs and parts are ordered?
That's always a concern. Our DR plan has scripts in place that can convert existing PC's into a temp DB server, a temp file server and a temp mirror. Each workstation has a script in place to remap network drives & attach to the temp servers.
While I fully understand the rational for going it cheap, it will likely come to bite somebody one day. And if they refuse to buy off on the idea of decent fault tolerance, ensure it's in an email so your tail is not on the line when systems are down.
The file server $ are left over from my $10k total budget for the new server, OS, CAL's, A/V, etc, as well as a new gigabit switch and a new UPS.
If budget is an absolute show-stopper, build a less expensive machine for the domain controller (or use the old one), and turn the higher-end fault tolerant server into the file server. That way, really the only thing you need to buy is another Windows Server 2003 license and some kind of backup system.
The total budget is my limit though I certainly can reevaluate the distribution. "Twins" could be a very palatable way to go.
Primary (protect the data):
<snip>
Secondary (uptime and fault tolerance):
<snip>
Tertiary (performance):
I'm certainly looking for RAID on the PDC. The more I read the more I want it on both machines. We have backup systems in place & UPS's. The current server that I inherited does not have RAID and was originally running on just one drive: the boot partition (including Exchange DB) & the data/files partition. I've split things up on to three drives but I finally have approval for the new server. We are getting a Dell server & a gigabit switch. Our cable internet service is pretty fast (speed tests regularly give me 12 - 15 down & 4 - 6 up).
For small companies like yours, down time is bad, but not nearly as bad as losing all data.
Indeed. Our backup drives leave the building every day (they have a 5 week recovery horizon). We do full backups (not incremental), the DB's & system state are also copied to a separate PC and we have four quarterly backups at the ready.
It's not a question of if that's going to happen. It's a question of when.
It already has (due to User error rather than HW). Procedures & documentation were in place and everything went as planned.
Thanks for all the input so far.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram