Note that the impact of making a server a GC (once it has completed the
initial replication) is a function of the overall volatility of your
directory and the location of other GC's. A GC must have a source for each
naming context in the forest, but the source can be another GC.
-s
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Great Cthulhu
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 2:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] GC/DC
>
>
> So, basically, plan carefully and get your servers ready for the big
> performance hit when you promote them to GC servers.
>
> Take vacation when you run /forestprep...
>
> (:=
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Murray-Smith Tony CF CH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 6:13 AM
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GC/DC
>
>
> > Here's another view from :
> >
> >
> http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=9672&Key=Ac
> tive%20Dir
> > ectory%20%28AD%29
> >
> > The relevant extract is:
> >
> > "Part of AD planning involves figuring out how many GC servers
> you need to
> > help make logons happen quickly and where to put those GC servers. You
> might
> > like to be able to make every domain controller into a GC server. But
> > keeping all of those GC servers up-to-date would slow down the
> network and
> > the domain controllers. AD planners need to seek a balance
> between network
> > response time and the number of GC servers.
> >
> > The GC is an essential part of logons for any multidomain
> forest. But in a
> > single-domain forest, only one domain can log on a user, so a GC seems
> > irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, yes and no, according to Andreas
> Luther, one
> > of three Microsoft folks who give presentations about AD and
> how it works.
> > (These presentations are quite good and worth attending if you get the
> > chance.) According to Luther, although single-domain forests shouldn't
> need
> > GC servers, some server applications (he didn't say which) seek out a GC
> > server regardless of the number of domains in a forest. So, you
> might want
> > to have as many GC servers around as possible, to keep that sort of
> > application happy.
> >
> > Making a domain controller a GC server is costly in terms of server
> > performance in a multidomain forest, but not in a single-domain
> world; the
> > process of distilling a single domain into a GC is simple and
> fast. So, if
> > you have a single-domain forest, you might consider making all
> your domain
> > controllers GC servers."
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ruth Collingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Montag, 19. Februar 2001 16:42
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [ActiveDir] GC/DC
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the replies to the OU question.
> >
> > I have another question about Domain Controllers that act as Global
> Catalog
> > Servers. I know that the DC holding the Infrastructure Master FSMO role
> > shouldn't be a GC Server, but is there any reason why ALL other DCs
> > shouldn't be set as GC Servers? It seems to me that GCs are a
> good thing
> > (for logon and E2K) so shouldn't it be a case of 'the more the merrier'?
> >
> > Cheers again,
> > Ruth
> >
> >
> >
> > DISCLAIMER: Any e-mail messages from the Bank for International
> Settlements
> > are sent in good faith, but shall not be binding nor construed as
> > constituting any obligation on the part of the Bank.
> >
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail contains confidential information,
> which
> > is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above.
> If you have
> > received this communication in error, please notify the sender
> immediately
> > via e-mail and return the entire message. Thank you for your assistance.
> > See http://www.activedir.org for further information.
> > See http://www.activedir.org for further information.
> >
>
> See http://www.activedir.org for further information.
>
See http://www.activedir.org for further information.
