Hi Brad,
Just to add some capacity management thoughts:
For argument sake, lets say each user facing ARS can comfortably process
400 concurrent users (BMC say more but lets not start that one again).
Then this means you have a total capacity of 800 concurrent users
(before the graph starts to drop off). Which is great but be aware that
if you have a projected concurrent user base of more than 400 e.g. 600,
then if one ARS fails, your single instance is in trouble. People often
make the mistake of just having two ARS facing servers for redundancy
and not taking into account capacity management.
Escalation/mail server - From my experience, people forget that
escalations tend to make the largest and most *table scan* searches (not
saying the filters/queries are not using indexes, but the fact they ask
for more than 70% of the data). So thats big hits on memory and CPU.
Especially when they process things like SLM measurements every minute
etc. So therefore these servers will definable get busier over time
(more time == more data) but more importantly, those functions are
business critical and your design has them as a single point of failure.
Therefore in my opinion, in answer to your questions, yes include it in
the server group so it can fail them to the user facing servers. Yes it
will have a negative impact in the event of a failure but you can't do
without those functions.
With regards to turning off the admin server. This is not an option if
you join the single server to the server group. If you checked *that
checkbox* while in the server group, it will complain and say something
about it being handled by the server ranking/group. However you can have
a server group with just one server. The rankings form will just have
that one entry with all the functions assigned to it.
Just my 2 pence worth :)
Kind regards
Danny
------ Original Message ------
From: "BradRemedy" <bradrem...@gmail.com>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: 31/07/2014 10:38:02
Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
**
Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer.
We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to
ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment
now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our
DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting.
This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for
Remedy.
We are looking at having the following architecture setup:
So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The
Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted
to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted
them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users.
What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the
ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for
it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also
need to include it in the server group but with its only job as
processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?.
Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for
now, can I turn off the "Administration Server" option and use it as
normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the
second server to the server group at a later stage ?
Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing?
Any advice is appreciated.
Thanks
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
