Tom: >From the limitations perspective, in our testing, we found that the application worked well on the F&P boxes but we found it sensitive to accidental mis-configuration and difficult to recover from these issues. We set a policy that only those trained on the configuration and operation were to do any admin work on the DoubleTake systems. I can go into more issues off list if you want. I was involved in some of the initial work at our Company but that has since moved to another team
AS far as exchange, I've work with Exchange since 4.0 and understand the nature of the beast so to speak. With all the inherent issues around I/O as well as the DB being in an inconsistent state from the time you start the services (RAM, Cache, logs, etc) and our perceived "touchiness" around DoubleTake, I could not see introducing it into out exchange environment (~20K users). Maybe it was an unjustified prejudice. We pride ourselves in running a pretty good exchange shop in regards to availability, etc. and I did not want to risk that. Diane -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kern, Tom Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 7:12 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Doubletake(OT) Can you elaborate further on why you don't feel comfortable using it with Exchange as well as what you think the limitations are, if you don't mind? Thanks a lot. Ayers, Diane wrote: > We use DoubleTake on a number of DAS based File/Print servers in our > distributed environment that are fairly large (~1 TB). We implemented > it when we had some server failures that created extended outages for > clients while we recovered data from backup tapes. Our current > implementation is locally across a dedicated NIC to a "stand by" > server that can take over if we lose the primary. In our > configuration and failover or failback is a manually initiated > process. > > It seems to work pretty well but there are some limitations. We > briefly considered using it for Exchange and it may work for smaller > environments but I was not comfortable using it in a medium or large > exchange shop. I can't speak to SQL. Bottom line, It seems to work > well for File servers but I would not go farther than that. There > seems to be better ways of addressing the other systems. > > We are taking a close look at FRS that is in R2. We are hoping that > MS got it right this time... ;-) > > Diane > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kern, Tom > Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 11:07 AM > To: ActiveDir (E-mail) > Subject: [ActiveDir] Doubletake(OT) > > Anyone using Doubletake out there? > My manager is interested in purchasing it and I was wondering what you > guys think of it, yea or nay. > > In my enviorment it doesn't seem to make sense except as to file > servers. DC's have built in redundancy if you have more than 1 and we > have an active/passive exchange2k3 cluster plus with RSG and/or dial > tone restore, it doesn't seem to apply here as well. > For MS SQL we are using a log shipping solution. > So i was just wondering if any one out there had experience with this > or a simillar product and how they are using it and if its worth it to > get. > > Thanks a lot. > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
