We tried to go with server consolidation years ago (before VM was popular) and kept running into issues with applications fighting with each other on the same machines (particularly Cisco products). Now that we're playing with VM and looking into blade servers, we're looking at it again. Not a surprise, we find that there are yet Cisco applications that they recommend stay on their own blade. *sigh*
From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:dholst...@nbm.org] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:54 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Do you all like fewer or more servers? I only have a hundred users. Been doing this for about 12 years. I always thought it was better to have more or less one major server per service. That way, if one of our services came down or needed work, I wouldn't be taking down the entire system. I have a buddy with fewer users than me and he has 20+ servers. Some in the air (virtual), some on the ground. I have seven servers running. Both of us host our web services at an outside firm. Both of us use Exchange. An outside firm says we should go with only a couple of servers. That sure would make things easier, but... ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
