We are planning to do a (new and clean) install of our servers They’re both Dell PowerEdge 2600, dual 2.4Mh, 2Gig Ram. The SQL/Navision server will have 4 x 73 Gig HDD (Raid 10), the other (DC)server will have 3 X 73 Gig Hdd (Raid 5). The DC server will run Exchange (27 Mailboxes) AND Terminal Server (15 connections), DNS, PrintServer, FileServer (15 Users), Global Catalog, … I will dedicate first processor to the DC related apps and Exchange. The second processor will be dedicated only to Terminal Services. (users will connect throug LL 2Mbit) The other server will run only SQL (2003) and Navision. Can anyone comment on this configuration? Is this a good config? Should I take some special “cautions”??? Any comment, suggestions, remarks … more than welcome Regards Joris
You do not mention an Operating System. Is it Windows Server 2003? Server 2K3 is light years better than W2k for Terminal Services. It may just be me, but I would be hesitant to run Exchange and Terminal Services on the same server, as they are both resource intensive. If your user base grows - you may find some performance issues.
You should defenitely run WTS on a separate maching with this number of users. Don’t mix server services and clients on the same machine. Rgds
quote:
Originally posted by DevinMcM
You do not mention an Operating System. Is it Windows Server 2003? … … run Exchange and Terminal Services on the same server, as they are both resource intensive.
OS on both servers (1 SQL and the other DC + WTS) probably will be Win2K3 … unless someonet can argument why I should stick with Win 2K. I was hesistant 'bout mixing Exchange and WTS on one machine, myself. But the alternative would be mixing SQL+Navision+WTS or SQL+Navision+DC. As far as I can see, this would be even more resource-consuming. The fact that both machines will have dual 2,4Mhz processors, won’t this provide enough “tolerance” to combine DC + WTS???
Hi, have a look at : http://www.mbsonline.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8204&SearchTerms=windows,2003, http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/suppapps/appdetails.mspx SURPRISING not all navision options are supported[:I][:I]
WTS should NOT be run on a DC, especially one that also runs a CPU/RAM intensive service like SQL or Exchange Server. Running Terminal Server on a DC is a huge security risk, as you have to allow all users that access TS the “Logon Locally” right to the Default Domain Controllers GPO, which give them access to logon at the server console at any DC in your AD Domain. Terminal Server should be a lean, fast machine, like 4GB of RAM & 2 CPUs, running absolutely nothing else. Having interactive sessions competing with SQL or Exchange is a design no-no. A separate dual Xeon member server can be added for less than $5K with enough horsepower to host 50+ sessions. In SBS 2003 it’s (TS) not even an option anymore (hint). Patrick Rouse Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server www.patrickrouse.com/ts.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Joris@Vanpelt-nv.be
quote:
Originally posted by DevinMcM
You do not mention an Operating System. Is it Windows Server 2003? … … run Exchange and Terminal Services on the same server, as they are both resource intensive.
OS on both servers (1 SQL and the other DC + WTS) probably will be Win2K3 … unless someonet can argument why I should stick with Win 2K. I was hesistant 'bout mixing Exchange and WTS on one machine, myself. But the alternative would be mixing SQL+Navision+WTS or SQL+Navision+DC. As far as I can see, this would be even more resource-consuming. The fact that both machines will have dual 2,4Mhz processors, won’t this provide enough “tolerance” to combine DC + WTS???
ions
Joris, hardware is cheap, you need to seperate these machines, you will pay for it later if you don’t do it now.
Thanks for the replies to you all … Unfortunately, all thes arguments couldn’t confince my boss to spend the extra budget for an adittional server. (I’m working for this SMALL company in the “Construction Materials Sales-sector” since 4 months … Before I started here, they never even heard about, difference between desktop en server, security, domains, Terminal Server … They had one AS/400 and 25 Terminal-clients … that’s it. My job was (is) to look for a complete automation (and the descision has been made now to work with Navision) … And now I have to spread the costs for hardware, software, license, active components … over a couple of years… An extra server (dedicated WTS) is not an option for the next two years 
[:(!] Keeping all your posts in mind, guess I’ll have to “puzzle” and try to make the best out of it. Nevertheless, if anyone still have some “tuning” or “security” hitns/tips to deal with my proposed config, welcome welcome welcome
Do you use 1GBit Networkcards to connect Servers ? What volume of exchange traffic is expected ? printserver for how many printers ? Printing volume ? Size of plots / prints ? Fileserver for CAD ? Fileserver for other databases ? and so on and on and on … I had the same resistant by my boss, but i choose a cheap single procesoor machine (P4-2,6 1Gbyte Ram ~700 EUR ) for WTS, clients are connected each by 128KBit and it worked well for 12 concurrent user. I think theses little costs are worth to discuss.
The DC + WTS server will have 2 x 1Gbit Nics. The volume of exchange-traffic, guess I’ll have to make a wild guess; 26 users @ 2000Kb/day + 1 user (my boss) @ 50MB/day … There will be running 3 printers (for approx 100 x 150Kb/day), no cad (or other large/intensive files … just some .doc and .xls for 15 users) So what the part of DC, DHCP,DNS, file and print server activities isconcerned, I think this server will consume almost no resources. Most of resources will go to Exchange and WTS. I am convinced a extra (cheap) server (~ € 700) is the best solution … but ]$*ù%£# … it seems like even this is not going to be an option. And this makes me feel quiet desperate.
Then take a look in a short risk counting : 1 worker costs boss app. 35,- Eur / h 27 boxes / 15 accounts → app 20 concurent user 1 hour server not running : = 20 User * 35,- EUR = 700 ,- EUR Risk that a user takes navision to crash ? I think none Risk that printserver rises server down : rare, but it consume cpu-power Risk that DC goes down : rare Risk of exchange : medium - high : virus attacks, security holes and so on. I think, with view on this, 1 h server down is more often then once a year → 700 ,- earned withhin a year → So buy 3 Server 1.) DC and so on 2.) SQL 3.) WTS
You should not double up tasks, but it is understood in your situation. You need more drives for the SQL server, though. Unless you have tremendous storage needs, look in to 36 GB drives, and getting at least 6 of them, so that you can mirror your data, and have at least one drive for OS, database, and log files.
Hi Joris, we have all been there, and you may have to make the mistake your self to learn, sad as it may seem. 1/ Since you have to do it any way, step one is to move to c/side, instead of sql. 2/ you don’t need expensive 1 gig links, its going over a wan in the end any way, so save money there. 3/ spend what money you can on disks. 4/ navision does not need so much ram and cpu as sql, so you will save there. that will give you enough money to buy three servers. serv 1 - navision c/side cpu Piii 500mhz ram 512 Meg disks 1 for os 4 in raid 0 for db, serv 2 wts, bdc cpu Piii 2.4ghz ram 1 gig disks 1 serv 3 the rest follow the spec you had above. these three will probably cost less than the two you originally wanted.
The whole idea is to keep TS off of a DC for security reasons & away from SQL or Exchange for performance reasons. I’d run Navision w/ C/SIDE on your Server1 as a DC, Exchange/DC on a second not-so-expensive server with sufficient RAM for the Information Store & splurge on the TS, as this is the one that users will notice the performance increase from 2 fast CPUs & a few GIGs or RAM. With only 2-3 servers to choose from you definitely have to make some hard choices and going with C/SIDE instead of SQL Server would be prudent, as SQL Server is somewhat of a security risk on a DC. Exchange is not recommended to run on a DC, but works just fine, no real added security risk. If I had your hardware budget I’d be happy to put together a proposal you can live with (free) Don’t put TS on the DC, you’ll regret it.
quote:
Originally posted by David Singleton
Hi Joris, we have all been there, and you may have to make the mistake your self to learn, sad as it may seem. 1/ Since you have to do it any way, step one is to move to c/side, instead of sql. 2/ you don’t need expensive 1 gig links, its going over a wan in the end any way, so save money there. 3/ spend what money you can on disks. 4/ navision does not need so much ram and cpu as sql, so you will save there. that will give you enough money to buy three servers. serv 1 - navision c/side cpu Piii 500mhz ram 512 Meg disks 1 for os 4 in raid 0 for db, serv 2 wts, bdc cpu Piii 2.4ghz ram 1 gig disks 1 serv 3 the rest follow the spec you had above. these three will probably cost less than the two you originally wanted.
Hi Patrick, I agree with your concerns on security, but in this case, I don’t think security is an issue, here its just a case of save a buck and make it work. To be honest, I can’t see why they keep exchange in house, it would be better to at least out source that. In reality the balance will come when deciding where the business is. i.e. Navision, eMail or the remote users. From my experience in cases like this, “the boss” is not going to spend money on security or reliablity until one of them isbreached.
Well Thanks to you all. Using this forum-topic, I finally convienced my boss to get a dedicated WTS server. It’s gona be a 2,6Mhz with 2 Gig Ram and 2 x 73 Gig HDD. For only 15 clientsessions, this will absolutely do! Thanks to you all. (The lesson I’ve learned; “If you really wanna push your ideas, first post it” 
That is what NOLUG is here for. (well one of the reasons).
Glad to be of help.
quote:
Originally posted by Joris@Vanpelt-nv.be
Well Thanks to you all. Using this forum-topic, I finally convienced my boss to get a dedicated WTS server. It’s gona be a 2,6Mhz with 2 Gig Ram and 2 x 73 Gig HDD. For only 15 clientsessions, this will absolutely do! Thanks to you all. (The lesson I’ve learned; “If you really wanna push your ideas, first post it”