Chris, I completely agree with you about the perils of running 2 nodes on a single physical box, but what do you think of the following:
If I understand MS's best practice for EXCH clustering, they support scale-up & -out models. With scale-up you need to build both A & P nodes for each EXCH cluster. With scale-out you have multiple A nodes & 1 P node in the cluster. Now with VM(ware) you're supposedly can have same HA as the scale-up model with fewer servers than the scale-out. Instead of the MS's scale-out, with VM you could use 2 servers each containing both A and P nodes. This works out better because it doesn't rely on a single P node to cover multiple A nodes in a cluster. So you could build an 8-node cluster using only 4 servers, with each server, running 2 separate clusters. I'm not sure if it would be supported by MS, but would it make sense to run an EXCH cluster like that? Alex -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2k3 cluster question (general) The purpose of a cluster is ostensibly to provide high availability. As such it's my belief that one needs to understand the boundaries of supportability and best practices for a cluster and draw a line as close to the center as possible. So in a scenario where one had a 4 node cluster where each of 2 nodes exists on a single physical machine it would seem to me that you have a pretty basic design flaw. If you are running an N+1 cluster you lack sufficient nodes per physical host to run 3 nodes in the event of a single physical hardware failure. If you're running N+2 you now have all the complexity of a 4 Node system with all the benefits[1] of an A/A cluster. A FE or connector Exchange server on virtualized HW seems like a perfectly reasonable deployment scenario for many organizations. I am not convinced that deploying a mailbox server on same is reasonable and even less convinced it increases availability. I guess it really depends on what problem you're trying to solve and I didn't see any evidence of a problem or a solution in the OP comments. [1] Do I really need to clarify that "benefits" is tongue in cheek when discussing A/A clusters? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alex Alborzfard > Posted At: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 3:01 PM > Posted To: swynk > Conversation: E2k3 cluster question (general) > Subject: RE: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > Dare I ask: what is specifically wrong with virtualizing Exchange or is > it virtualzing an Exchange cluster? What are the major issues and > pitfalls? > > Alex > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Chris Scharff > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 3:35 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > In a lab sire. In production.... can't think of a reason other than > hating your job and wanting a new one. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wehner, Paul > > (wehnerpl) > > Posted At: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 2:22 PM Posted To: swynk > > Conversation: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > Subject: RE: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > > > I'm going to assemble extra ips, quorum, store volumes and give it a > > shot. > > Might be moderately useful to have two virtual servers on a two node > > cluster. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed > > Crowley [MVP] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 2:04 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > > > I suppose you could install Microsoft Virtual Server and run the new > > Exchange servers in virtual machines, but I don't recommend it for a > > production environment. > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > Wehner, Paul (wehnerpl) > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 10:34 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: E2k3 cluster question (general) > > > > > > I have a two node active/passive exchange cluster working fine. > > Is it possible to add a second exchange cluster to these two boxes? > > (assuming new ips, different store volumes, etc) Thanks, Paul _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
