I meant ~2Tb data in there (first line). Blackberry
From: Ramatowski, Paul M. Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 09:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues <exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> Subject: Re: Exchange 2010 Design Questions We have 6500 mbx, ~2G worth in them, 6 servers in two sites, 3 active DB's on each server, each DB had a copy local and a copy in the cross-site (hope that makes sense). Avg mbx 250mb, range from a couple mb to 10G. The smaller mbx's are throwaways, the larger are generic shared mbx's. Virtually all are running in cached mode, 2K3, 2K7 with a smattering of 2K10 clients. Probably 4500 clients are at the far end of dual or quad T1's with a cable modem B/U, QOS on all the links so mail gets at most 40-50%. Intra site is 10G, intra site is 250-300Mb (I think) That's a bit of background, the servers are Dell 510's , dual 6 core procs hyperthreaded so 24 "cores" each server. (2.66 Xeon fwiw) kicker? Each DB and logs for each DB are on a 7500 rpm drive (circular logging) eek. Have never had an issue with cpu in that config. Saw things that recommended turning off hyperthreading, was ready to do so if necessary but looking at day to day ops, maintenance, us running scripts, doing junk on a server, it just never was necessary. Now the only thing I'd wonder is your memory- we're at 48G in each server, not sure if 24 would work for us. Ymmv. Blackberry From: Sean Martin [mailto:seanmarti...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 07:32 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues <exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> Subject: Exchange 2010 Design Questions Hello all, I'm a little more than a year removed from any real Exchange management but I am loosely involved with my company's re-vitalized effort to migrate from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2010. We recently had an Exchange PFE onsite to assist with a high-level design for our environment. One of the recommendations kind of threw me for a loop and I wanted to get some feedback from those of you running Exchange 2010. Disable Hyper-threading - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd346699.aspx: The article states: "Hyperthreading causes capacity planning and monitoring challenges, and as a result, the expected gain in CPU overhead is likely not justified. Hyperthreading should be disabled by default for production Exchange servers and only enabled if absolutely necessary as a temporary measure to increase CPU capacity until additional hardware can be obtained." What capacity planning and monitoring challenges are introduced? We've been running hyper-threaded multi-core servers for many, many years and I can't think of any challenges that were introduced. Is there a specific scenario I'm not thinking about that is specific to Exchange capacity planning or monitoring? FWIW, we have 6 physical servers which will be evenly distributed between two active sites based on the latest design. Servers are Dell PowerEdge M610 blade servers with dual 6-core procs, 24GB memory, QLogic 8GB HBAs* connecting to Compellent Storage. *3 servers at one site will actually leverage infiniband (4x40GB) connectivity to Xsigo directors which will distribute vHBAs and vNICs. Any insight would be appreciated. - Sean --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist