How many servers are needed to deploy 07? 1

[glamprecht1]

Hello all...

There seems to be a lot of scenarios for deploying exchange 2007. I just wanted to poll everyone’s opinion on two things.

We have about 500 users and about 1500 mailboxes servicing three different domains. (Org names on header of email) To successfully deploy exchange07 with all the bells and goodies.....
1) Do you really need two or even three exchange servers? I am reading about a front end and a back end and what-not. Right now we have one 2003 exchange server and on 5 year old hardware it seems to be doing fine.
2) Can we successfully virtualize Exchange? Is there really true need to bring in dedicated hardware?

We are currently in the process of installing a full blown SAN with multiple VM servers. We want to virtualize what we can. Not sure if it is a good idea or not....

 

[Davetoo]

I wouldn't recommend virtualizing Exchange, period.

I have about 450 users and about 500 mailboxes and I'm running it all on one Exchange 2007 server (well...when I'm done I will be at least).

It really depends upon your network structure as to how best you should deploy Exchange. If you have a WAN with good high speed dedicated connections, such as I do, then I think one server will work just fine.

I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

There are no more PDC's! There are DC's with FSMO roles!

 

[glamprecht1]

Thanks for the Response Davetoo..

That is my exact thinking. My boss is going nutso over virtualization and does not see why we dont virtualize everything. But our current exchange server gets hit pretty hard and i feel that dedicated hardware is the right way to go.

 

[58sniper]

1500 is easily possible on 1 server. If it were me, it would 3; 2 servers in a CCR cluster, and a HT/CAS server. But it's certainly possible on a properly sized single server. I've had 10,000 on a single server.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[Zelandakh]

500 users and 1500 mailboxes...

1 server is going to be able to cope but 2 would be better from an availability point of view.

Pat's 3 box solution would be ideal if a little expensive.

Virtualisation is an option - virtualise all 3 boxes on 1 physical box but it may well grind to a halt and if the physical box goes, all is gone. Virtualising across 2 boxes would help but then why not keep them physical?

 

[medfordjared]

You shouldn't virtualize anything with intense IO like exchange, databases, etc. You could theoretically put the information store on it's own box, then the other components, like edge/transport server on a virtualized machine.

I'm running exchange for about 50 users on 1 machine, but it's not an ideal setup. I would have preferred to 'not' have had to put the whole shebang in the dmz, instead segmenting the info store on the internal segment, the edge servers in the dmz and maybe an ISA server for OWA.

 

[Zelandakh]

You can virtualise Exchange without a worry and use a SAN for the physical stores which would mitigate the IO worries.

1 box for 50 users? Thousands of SBS installers would say that's a good plan.

 

[Davetoo]

A star for pointing out we sometimes get caught up in all the intricacies and "neat" things with the software and hardware we have before us...and forget what problem we're actually trying to solve.

My entire organization is running off a ten year old, used, IBM Netfinity 5000 server, 500Mhz, 1GB RAM (well, minus about a dozen mailboxes on my 2007 box). I'll not jinx myself by saying anything further, but I think y'all get my drift.

Just because we can do all these neat things, doesn't mean we have to, or that anyone else has to.

I'm Certifiable, not cert-ified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

There are no more PDC's! There are DC's with FSMO roles!

 

[rbritton18]

I think running everyone on one box is easier to maintain. I am running 150 users and 200 mailboxes on one Dell Power edge 2300 and have not had any problems at all. I hope I did not just jinx it.

 

[58sniper]

You have a 2300 running 64 bit Windows? Impressive. I didn't think it would work.

Pat Richard MVP
Plan for performance, and capacity takes care of itself. Plan for capacity, and suffer poor performance.

http://www.ucblogs.net/blogs/exchange/

 

[Zelandakh]

I think he means 2003