<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Exchange 2003 / File Server Cluster &#8211; Best practice &#8211; WHAT IS your OPINION?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/exchange-2003-file-server-cluster-best-practice-what-is-your-opinion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/exchange-2003-file-server-cluster-best-practice-what-is-your-opinion/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:59:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: ocarmona</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/exchange-2003-file-server-cluster-best-practice-what-is-your-opinion/#comment-44629</link>
		<dc:creator>ocarmona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-44629</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ok, guys this is what  I have so far :

Spindles	LUNS	RAID	Available Space	
0	Quorum	RAID 1		139	
1					
2	EDB	RAID 5		279.39	
3					
4					
5	NODE 2	x		N/A	
6	NODE 1	x		N/A	
7	LOGS	RAID 1		139	
8					
9	FILES SVS	RAID 5			
10					
11				558.78	
12					
13					
14					
15	Processor	x	n/a	


Hopefully you understand that ... my boss was pushing to make the EDB storage group a RAID 1 and to put the Transaction logs in the RAID 5 for file services. 

What do you guys think about what he wants?? I&#039;m not in agreement. I think is easier to expand space than Exchange...
					
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, guys this is what  I have so far :</p>
<p>Spindles	LUNS	RAID	Available Space<br />
0	Quorum	RAID 1		139<br />
1<br />
2	EDB	RAID 5		279.39<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5	NODE 2	x		N/A<br />
6	NODE 1	x		N/A<br />
7	LOGS	RAID 1		139<br />
8<br />
9	FILES SVS	RAID 5<br />
10<br />
11				558.78<br />
12<br />
13<br />
14<br />
15	Processor	x	n/a	</p>
<p>Hopefully you understand that &#8230; my boss was pushing to make the EDB storage group a RAID 1 and to put the Transaction logs in the RAID 5 for file services. </p>
<p>What do you guys think about what he wants?? I&#8217;m not in agreement. I think is easier to expand space than Exchange&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: storagebum</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/exchange-2003-file-server-cluster-best-practice-what-is-your-opinion/#comment-44630</link>
		<dc:creator>storagebum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-44630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would agree with the drive separtion for logs and databases and binaries. 

It&#039;s unclear if your doing an Active/Passive exchange and file print or doing A/P exchange plus a stand alone file print.  

If you want to be creative do both on the same cluster.   Make the Exchage server A/P and define node 1 as it&#039;s primary location and make the File print primary on node 2.   This is can be considered active/active clustering depending on how you look at it, but both server are doing work but not the same work.  

]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would agree with the drive separtion for logs and databases and binaries. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s unclear if your doing an Active/Passive exchange and file print or doing A/P exchange plus a stand alone file print.  </p>
<p>If you want to be creative do both on the same cluster.   Make the Exchage server A/P and define node 1 as it&#8217;s primary location and make the File print primary on node 2.   This is can be considered active/active clustering depending on how you look at it, but both server are doing work but not the same work.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aquaticous</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/exchange-2003-file-server-cluster-best-practice-what-is-your-opinion/#comment-44631</link>
		<dc:creator>aquaticous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-44631</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Go here---&gt; http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/downloads/2003/exbpa/default.mspx this will help you make a good decision on what will work best for your situation.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Go here&#8212;&gt; <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/downloads/2003/exbpa/default.mspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/downloads/2003/exbpa/default.mspx</a> this will help you make a good decision on what will work best for your situation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 6/9 queries in 0.008 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 296/299 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-06-19 17:13:38 -->