how many additional servers/hardware do we need?

[myone]

some "basic" questions...

we currently have a server (exchange, OWA, file sharing and DNS), firewall, router and 3 switches.

we will be adding in database, isa server and security system....

how many additional servers/hardware do we need?

how do i connect all the servrs and hardware?

thanks 4 yr reply in advance.

[cluberti]

If you're going to be safe, you'll be adding at least one server for each additional task. If your Exchange server is on a DC, you should be adding another server for a dedicated DC as well (never run Exchange on a DC, unless it's SBS!!!). So, I'd say you'd end up with 1 server for each of the following tasks: Exchange, DC (2x), File/Print, Database, ISA, Security System - 7 servers total.

Edited May 23, 2006 by cluberti

[myone]

If you're going to be safe, you'll be adding at least one server for each additional task. If your Exchange server is on a DC, you should be adding another server for a dedicated DC as well (never run Exchange on a DC, unless it's SBS!!!). So, I'd say you'd end up with 1 server for each of the following tasks: Exchange, DC (2x), File/Print, Database, ISA, Security System - 7 servers total.

What is DC?

can u elaborate on "never run Exchange on a DC, unless it's SBS!!!"?

7 servers? wow!

[cluberti]

DC = domain controller

And Exchange requires lots of memory (and is poor at management of said memory), and DC's also require quite a bit of memory - therefore, it is STRONGLY suggested, if you want stable servers, to not run Exchange on a DC .

[myone]

DC = domain controller

And Exchange requires lots of memory (and is poor at management of said memory), and DC's also require quite a bit of memory - therefore, it is STRONGLY suggested, if you want stable servers, to not run Exchange on a DC .

Does ISA require a lots of memory too? how will it affect the network speed?

[cluberti]

If you're using it as a firewall and VPN server, then yes, 2GB of RAM would be goot, 4GB might be even better if you're servicing more than 50 VPN connections at one time.

[fizban2]

myone,

how many clients are connecting to this network? how many will be making VPn connections? if the company is smaller you can get away with fewer servers, but it isn't recommended as when you grow and expand you will have some serious growing pains migrating services off one server to a new dedicated one. Connecting all the servers and hardware would be done through swiches, if they are at alt sites or remote sites then you would have to deal with WAN links and point to point VPN scenerios also

[myone]

err... i think the max VPN users (for the future) will be only < 25.

i guess at this time, 4 servers should be enough?

1) Exchange, File Sharing, DNS - max 90 users

2) Database server - mysql or ms sql - max 30 users

3) ISA server 2004

4) Security system - 8 cameras

what u think?

Edited May 25, 2006 by myone

[cluberti]

What about a domain controller? And, you really should have two (at least), even in a small environment - so you can have two GCs, and spread the FSMO roles...

[fizban2]

2 x DC both with DNS, DHCP, GC (global Catalogs), WINS,

1 x Exchange Server

1 x DB server

1 x ISA Server

1 x Security Server

6 would be the ideal suggestion for Servers. Please please please do what you can to at least get the DCs and Exchange on their own boxs, it will save you years of hassle. Remeber it may seem like this is a huge cost to foot at the beginning, but think of the down time it will save, say you only buy 3 server and one goes down, did you just lose your DC and exchange box? how much is that going to cost you in lost data, time and energy to replace and recreate?

[myone]

2 x DC both with DNS, DHCP, GC (global Catalogs), WINS,

1 x Exchange Server

1 x DB server

1 x ISA Server

1 x Security Server

6 would be the ideal suggestion for Servers. Please please please do what you can to at least get the DCs and Exchange on their own boxs, it will save you years of hassle. Remeber it may seem like this is a huge cost to foot at the beginning, but think of the down time it will save, say you only buy 3 server and one goes down, did you just lose your DC and exchange box? how much is that going to cost you in lost data, time and energy to replace and recreate?

oh dear.... that will be a big change for us...... but why 2 DC?

[CoffeeFiend]

First post in months... Back, sorta

Well, it sounds like a SBE (only 3 switches... can't be too much PCs or people working there).

Personally (that being the keyword here), I'd take a different approach.

It sounds like your email is already taken care of (using exchange on existing server), so I'll fous only on the new things and how much new stuff you need.

1) Database. What you'll need here can VASTLY vary. It truly depends on what you'll run, and mainly what you'll do with it. MySQL or MS SQL... They're like totally different. They tend to answer completely different needs.

MySQL is free, more lightweight, but not quite a real enterprise RDBMS like MSSQL/DB2/Oracle or even PostreSQL... If it's for some kind of PHP based CMS for an intranet web server or such, MySQL might be the ideal choice (likely it'll use some MySQL-proprietary SQL anyways).

MS SQL (and Oracle and DB2 and again, PostgreSQL mostly fits here too) is a "heavier" but more powerful system (in terms of enterprise features and such). All are great products. And nowadays all 3 big names offer a free (albeit limited) product (SQL Server Express, Oracle 10g Express, and DB2 Express-C) while PostgreSQL is completely free. The limitations on those "express" prodocuts is mainly a max RAM/CPU usage limit (like 4GB RAM and one CPU max) - which is PLENTY for most tasks, and offers an easy (and competitively priced) upgrade path.

Unless your main use will be those PHP-ish web apps and such, I'd go with one of the other DBs. All 4 are frankly quite good. You can try them for free ("kick the tires"), and see what works best for you (the Oracle install can be finnicky on the JRE version seemingly). If you're a all-Microsoft shop, likely you'll prefer MS SQL (mainly because of how well it integrates with their own dev tools and other products), but the others would work quite well too. [bTW, there are some great free dev tools from Microsoft - Visual Web Developper, Visual C# Express, etc - you can even get Visual Studio Standard for free if you know where to look - yes, I mean legally; and loads of free extras... too many to list here).

But you're not quite saying enough to be able to really help here... No idea what you'll do with it whatsoever. Being a smallish shop, I would tend to say those "express" database products will be enough (assuming no one will run stupid n00b SQL i.e. queries that peg the CPU for 5 minutes, and that you won't get into pretty serious/heavy business intelligence/warehousing/data mining stuff or the like). If you plan on developping apps in-house and that your devs will screw something up all the time and take your production DB down (or make it overly busy all the time), then a dev database is a good idea (it's a good idea in general to separate dev and production DBs regardless). Any old cheap PC with enough RAM and one of those express editions DBs should suffice for that (SQL Server Developper Ed is like 50$ too IIRC).

It's a matter of knowing not only what you need now, but foreseeing what the company will need in the future (next few years). Are the business/accounting/marketing types going to want some data mining app next year? Are you going to push nice Smart Client apps? Any "Line-of-Business" apps that will need a DB "backend"? Anything special you are or will be developping in-house? ...

Anyhow. Unless you're doing something heavy (like, not just simple web apps), a small server will be plenty for this (I'd even be tempted to put it on a server that will do more than this, it just may be sitting 99% idle 99% of the time), just don't starve it on RAM or you'll get performance according to that (256MB won't really cut it...) What you really need to worry here is data integrity (which is partly why I tend to rule out MySQL for such use) and backing up the server - you better plan for the worst. Got a place to back everything up? (network share, tape, whatever). The day data vanishes into thin air, your job may do the same...

2) ISA Server: It's not ridiculously demanding, and you don't have a whole lot of users, but I'd definitely throw some RAM at it (it does caching too, that always benefits from more RAM). It's hard to exactly say how much hardware it'll need. 25 users that need loads of bandwidth, or mostly idle? It's mainly a matter of total bandwidth, and I can't guess/tell you how much bandwidth 25 users will use up... Either ways, that's not very many users at all. It shouldn't exactly need a powerful server. If I knew for sure your DB usage would be low enough, I'd be tempted to say put both on the same box (SBS could work great for this, lowering hardware and licensing costs).

3) Security System... Dunno. Never had that setup on a PC. Not exactly my field.

How many additional servers/hardware you need?

A couple servers for the DB server and ISA (again, that's pure guessing, no one can guess how much use/load you'll be putting on it for sure).

DNS, DHCP and WINS is ridiculously lightweight. You can run that on pretty much any server (those type of things could run on a 486 along with a basic firewall...) Not worried about that whatsoever. (I'd likely run it on the same box as the ISA server personally, and that's if you don't already have it running on another box or something).

DCs wise, the 2nd is the backup. That's somewhat problematic... Kinda expensive to buy 2 servers and 2 Win2003 licenses for that (a few thousand $ just for authenticating users), and it's typically a problem to put something else (like ISA, Exchange or SQL Server) on that box at the same time (again, unless you opt for SBS, which seems like a viable alternative in this scenario).

Perhaps 2 servers running SBS could do... Both serving as domain controllers, one of the two running ISA, the other running SQL server.

Yes, 6 servers would be ideal, but that's 3 times as much in hardware costs which is prohibitive to many small businesses (that means many thousands of $ in hardware alone), and Win2003 licenses for 6 servers vs 2 SBS 2003 licenses would set you back a couple thousand $ or more too (depends on the edition, etc). And lately everybody's getting into server consolidation, and it makes sense. Only 2 servers to maintain/upgrade/backup/monitor/manage/administer, etc instead of 6 (even more savings!) Not counting electricity savings (not just the server's usage, but less AC req'd too, double savings). Although I wouldn't go for the most basic configuration of the cheapest/weakest Dell server you can get either... (The PowerEdge 2800, dual 2.8GHz Xeon with 4GB RAM and SBS2003 Premium could be a viable option, with Redundant PSU, for around 2500$ each - don't forget about UPS'es either)

With that leftover $$$, you could buy a computers to run backup jobs if you don't have one already, or more storage space for your users, or much needed workstation upgrades, or CALs for whatever, or MS Office licenses, whatever you want, I'm sure you'd find a use for it...

Anyhow. A server for every little thing would be great if your company can afford it, but the reality is most small companies just can't afford it (and large companies tend to consolidate to fewer but beefier servers instead anyways). If you got lots of $$$, then by all means go and build a nice infrastructure... Buy like a dozen nice and powerful servers (backup server too, you didn't mention intranet/internet web servers or servers to hold user profiles or anything either), SQL Server Enterprise Ed or Oracle, a Fiber Channel SAN, redundant everything, new server room with nice UPS'es and AC everywhere... When you got the money, the choice is always easy. If the money's there, it's usually somewhat easy to justify the expense (ROI figures here and there, high availability figures, future expansion/needs, etc...). Given the size of the business (or what it appears to be), I doubt this is the case...

How do you connect all the servers and hardware?

I'd opt for Gigabit Ethernet nowadays. It's come down in price a LOT lately. Most servers now come with redundant GB ports, and decent switches are quite afforadable too. If possible, I'd link all the servers that way.

Those 2 Dells, UPS'es and a GB ethernet switch should set you back around 7k$ including taxes and all (depending on options and such). 6 or 7 servers would be *WAY* more - it would cost you more than that in Win2003 licenses and CALs alone, without including any actual hardware at all...

Hope that helps

[edit]: BTW, SBS 2003 R2 will be out in a couple months and it's quite nice - it includes SQL Server 2005 [workgroup ed; uses 2 CPUs/3GB RAM max] instead of SQL Server 2000. A *very* nice upgrade If you buy SBS 2003 non-R2 meanwhile, they can give you a R2 upgrade media kit for free.

Edited May 25, 2006 by crahak

[myone]

First post in months... Back, sorta

Well, it sounds like a SBE (only 3 switches... can't be too much PCs or people working there).

Personally (that being the keyword here), I'd take a different approach.

It sounds like your email is already taken care of (using exchange on existing server), so I'll fous only on the new things and how much new stuff you need.

1) Database. What you'll need here can VASTLY vary. It truly depends on what you'll run, and mainly what you'll do with it. MySQL or MS SQL... They're like totally different. They tend to answer completely different needs.

MySQL is free, more lightweight, but not quite a real enterprise RDBMS like MSSQL/DB2/Oracle or even PostreSQL... If it's for some kind of PHP based CMS for an intranet web server or such, MySQL might be the ideal choice (likely it'll use some MySQL-proprietary SQL anyways).

MS SQL (and Oracle and DB2 and again, PostgreSQL mostly fits here too) is a "heavier" but more powerful system (in terms of enterprise features and such). All are great products. And nowadays all 3 big names offer a free (albeit limited) product (SQL Server Express, Oracle 10g Express, and DB2 Express-C) while PostgreSQL is completely free. The limitations on those "express" prodocuts is mainly a max RAM/CPU usage limit (like 4GB RAM and one CPU max) - which is PLENTY for most tasks, and offers an easy (and competitively priced) upgrade path.

Unless your main use will be those PHP-ish web apps and such, I'd go with one of the other DBs. All 4 are frankly quite good. You can try them for free ("kick the tires"), and see what works best for you (the Oracle install can be finnicky on the JRE version seemingly). If you're a all-Microsoft shop, likely you'll prefer MS SQL (mainly because of how well it integrates with their own dev tools and other products), but the others would work quite well too. [bTW, there are some great free dev tools from Microsoft - Visual Web Developper, Visual C# Express, etc - you can even get Visual Studio Standard for free if you know where to look - yes, I mean legally; and loads of free extras... too many to list here).

But you're not quite saying enough to be able to really help here... No idea what you'll do with it whatsoever. Being a smallish shop, I would tend to say those "express" database products will be enough (assuming no one will run stupid n00b SQL i.e. queries that peg the CPU for 5 minutes, and that you won't get into pretty serious/heavy business intelligence/warehousing/data mining stuff or the like). If you plan on developping apps in-house and that your devs will screw something up all the time and take your production DB down (or make it overly busy all the time), then a dev database is a good idea (it's a good idea in general to separate dev and production DBs regardless). Any old cheap PC with enough RAM and one of those express editions DBs should suffice for that (SQL Server Developper Ed is like 50$ too IIRC).

It's a matter of knowing not only what you need now, but foreseeing what the company will need in the future (next few years). Are the business/accounting/marketing types going to want some data mining app next year? Are you going to push nice Smart Client apps? Any "Line-of-Business" apps that will need a DB "backend"? Anything special you are or will be developping in-house? ...

Anyhow. Unless you're doing something heavy (like, not just simple web apps), a small server will be plenty for this (I'd even be tempted to put it on a server that will do more than this, it just may be sitting 99% idle 99% of the time), just don't starve it on RAM or you'll get performance according to that (256MB won't really cut it...) What you really need to worry here is data integrity (which is partly why I tend to rule out MySQL for such use) and backing up the server - you better plan for the worst. Got a place to back everything up? (network share, tape, whatever). The day data vanishes into thin air, your job may do the same...

2) ISA Server: It's not ridiculously demanding, and you don't have a whole lot of users, but I'd definitely throw some RAM at it (it does caching too, that always benefits from more RAM). It's hard to exactly say how much hardware it'll need. 25 users that need loads of bandwidth, or mostly idle? It's mainly a matter of total bandwidth, and I can't guess/tell you how much bandwidth 25 users will use up... Either ways, that's not very many users at all. It shouldn't exactly need a powerful server. If I knew for sure your DB usage would be low enough, I'd be tempted to say put both on the same box (SBS could work great for this, lowering hardware and licensing costs).

3) Security System... Dunno. Never had that setup on a PC. Not exactly my field.

How many additional servers/hardware you need?

A couple servers for the DB server and ISA (again, that's pure guessing, no one can guess how much use/load you'll be putting on it for sure).

DNS, DHCP and WINS is ridiculously lightweight. You can run that on pretty much any server (those type of things could run on a 486 along with a basic firewall...) Not worried about that whatsoever. (I'd likely run it on the same box as the ISA server personally, and that's if you don't already have it running on another box or something).

DCs wise, the 2nd is the backup. That's somewhat problematic... Kinda expensive to buy 2 servers and 2 Win2003 licenses for that (a few thousand $ just for authenticating users), and it's typically a problem to put something else (like ISA, Exchange or SQL Server) on that box at the same time (again, unless you opt for SBS, which seems like a viable alternative in this scenario).

Perhaps 2 servers running SBS could do... Both serving as domain controllers, one of the two running ISA, the other running SQL server.

Yes, 6 servers would be ideal, but that's 3 times as much in hardware costs which is prohibitive to many small businesses (that means many thousands of $ in hardware alone), and Win2003 licenses for 6 servers vs 2 SBS 2003 licenses would set you back a couple thousand $ or more too (depends on the edition, etc). And lately everybody's getting into server consolidation, and it makes sense. Only 2 servers to maintain/upgrade/backup/monitor/manage/administer, etc instead of 6 (even more savings!) Not counting electricity savings (not just the server's usage, but less AC req'd too, double savings). Although I wouldn't go for the most basic configuration of the cheapest/weakest Dell server you can get either... (The PowerEdge 2800, dual 2.8GHz Xeon with 4GB RAM and SBS2003 Premium could be a viable option, with Redundant PSU, for around 2500$ each - don't forget about UPS'es either)

With that leftover $$$, you could buy a computers to run backup jobs if you don't have one already, or more storage space for your users, or much needed workstation upgrades, or CALs for whatever, or MS Office licenses, whatever you want, I'm sure you'd find a use for it...

Anyhow. A server for every little thing would be great if your company can afford it, but the reality is most small companies just can't afford it (and large companies tend to consolidate to fewer but beefier servers instead anyways). If you got lots of $$$, then by all means go and build a nice infrastructure... Buy like a dozen nice and powerful servers (backup server too, you didn't mention intranet/internet web servers or servers to hold user profiles or anything either), SQL Server Enterprise Ed or Oracle, a Fiber Channel SAN, redundant everything, new server room with nice UPS'es and AC everywhere... When you got the money, the choice is always easy. If the money's there, it's usually somewhat easy to justify the expense (ROI figures here and there, high availability figures, future expansion/needs, etc...). Given the size of the business (or what it appears to be), I doubt this is the case...

How do you connect all the servers and hardware?

I'd opt for Gigabit Ethernet nowadays. It's come down in price a LOT lately. Most servers now come with redundant GB ports, and decent switches are quite afforadable too. If possible, I'd link all the servers that way.

Those 2 Dells, UPS'es and a GB ethernet switch should set you back around 7k$ including taxes and all (depending on options and such). 6 or 7 servers would be *WAY* more - it would cost you more than that in Win2003 licenses and CALs alone, without including any actual hardware at all...

Hope that helps

[edit]: BTW, SBS 2003 R2 will be out in a couple months and it's quite nice - it includes SQL Server 2005 [workgroup ed; uses 2 CPUs/3GB RAM max] instead of SQL Server 2000. A *very* nice upgrade If you buy SBS 2003 non-R2 meanwhile, they can give you a R2 upgrade media kit for free.

WOW!!! I really need some time to digest your post! Thank you so much!!!

[CoffeeFiend]

You're welcome. Sad part is, I did limit myself (I could go on and on... for a very long time, but it gets boring and dry after a while).

Other things you could do with saved money: training of IT staff. You were questionning why 2 servers as DCs (a PDC and a BDC). Not knowing this (which isn't new by any measure, talking about NT 3 & 4 days - assuming you're going with this model; the DCs are peers in the new AD model, hence no primary/backup; all peers. Lots of companies still use the NT4 domain model though) does imply you (and perhaps more people) need brought up to speed about Domains, Active Directory, and perhaps a lot more stuff. Perhaps not pay a MCSE certification/course to everyone, but at least some good books (and time to read them), or perhaps some private training - even video training could help...

Going with only one DC would be a bad thing (and yes, I've seen PDCs go down before, or the network connection to them), giving "not authorized" errors to everyone until the BDC took over. You may want to know what to do when this happens...

And seeing everything you're adding to your network, you could spend some time thinking about your network architecture, doing some planning, and if possible having someone experienced in those kind of things have a look at the big picture.

Same goes for SQL Server and ISA. Expect that people will need training. Configuring ISA isn't exactly trivial... And whoever will be using the SQL server (web master?) may need some training too (like, so much of these guys only seem to know about MS access junk, no idea about SQL server or other real DBs whatsoever... be it security, T-SQL, relational database design, sprocs, you name it). Good reference books can't be a bad thing to have around either... (having knowledge to use the new and great soft only makes sense... no point in paying thousands to have it sit idle). Hopefully your admins will be able to handle all the new stuff (AD/Exchange primarily, but loads of other things, like server backups, routine maintenance/diagnostics/config on most of the soft, etc) i.e. you need a "real IT staff" at that point (or perhaps more training?) More costs...

Honestly, at this point, it could be a good idea to hire a consultant (not a "paper MCSE", someone who knows his stuff). Especially since you don't seem to truly know what you even want or need (MySQL or MSSQL or ?, not sure about DCs, other omissions...) He could see what needs you have, constraints, budget, etc and come up with a solution tailored to your particular scenario (which is seemingly getting more complex). He can make you different propositions, pick the exact hardware you need and everything.

[edit]: some small clarifications...

Edited May 27, 2006 by crahak