Douglas
Wed Jun 22 07:17:08 CDT 2005
Thank you Al.
I agree, we are debating between a Proliant DL380 and another server of
similar design but utilizing SATA disks. I really appreciate your opinion.
-Douglas
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:OUMr4$sdFHA.2880@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is the price difference that significant?
> I haven't worked with SATA drives, but keep in mind that if you have a
> bottleneck in an Exchange server, the first place you'll likely see it is
> in the disks.
>
> That said, unless your user profiles are concurrent and significantly
> banging away at the server, I wouldn't be concerned about using different
> drive technology in this situation. It's not likely they'll stress the
> server enough to make a difference unless they email DVD's all the time :)
>
>
>
> "Douglas" <dmciver@no.spam.please.com> wrote in message
> news:eF9wuLqdFHA.2548@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> We are going to put our Exchange box at a DataCenter with a 10Mbps
>> connection to it. We will also have a DC in the same cabinet. All of
>> our users, almost 100 or so, will be connecting with notebook computers
>> through RPC/HTTP. My question has to do with the power needed on the
>> exchange server.
>>
>> If all the connections are through RPC/HTTP will it make much or a
>> difference if we get a high speed server, dual 3.2Ghz, 4GB RAM, RAID 1 -
>> OS, RAID 1 - Logs, RAID 5 - DB? Or would we be fine with the same RAID
>> setup, but using SATA disks instead of SCSI. I just don't see how the
>> server will be that pressured if the only line into it is 3Mbps.
>>
>> Any help or advise is greatly appreciated!
>>
>> -Douglas
>>
>
>