 




<?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: What type of migration  is this?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/what-type-of-migration-is-this/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/what-type-of-migration-is-this/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 06:06:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: ehcraig</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/what-type-of-migration-is-this/#comment-45201</link>
		<dc:creator>ehcraig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 21:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-45201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for all your suggestions.

The type of migration, is a Windows Small Business Server (SBS) to Windows Server 2003 (WS2K), and it has been a real challenge.

I did take all your advice and installed the SQL Server on the WS2K - Std. Now I need to migrate all the data from the SQL on the SBS &amp; from the SQL on the WS2K - Enterprise to the new one on the WS2K - Std. After that, then the real challenge begins as I start to plan for the WS2K to take over &amp; the SBS to come down.

Evans]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for all your suggestions.</p>
<p>The type of migration, is a Windows Small Business Server (SBS) to Windows Server 2003 (WS2K), and it has been a real challenge.</p>
<p>I did take all your advice and installed the SQL Server on the WS2K &#8211; Std. Now I need to migrate all the data from the SQL on the SBS &amp; from the SQL on the WS2K &#8211; Enterprise to the new one on the WS2K &#8211; Std. After that, then the real challenge begins as I start to plan for the WS2K to take over &amp; the SBS to come down.</p>
<p>Evans</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: platypus</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/what-type-of-migration-is-this/#comment-45202</link>
		<dc:creator>platypus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:54:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-45202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m a little concerned, when you say &#039;Windows Business Server&#039; do you mean Small Business Server (SBS)?  If you were to mean that, that is a whole different ball game.  If you did not mean that, and we are just talking one domain and now all of your servers (all 4, I guess?) are in the same domain, I suggest you arrange it so your least powerful server is your primary DC, that does not typically require much load on a box.  Spread your Exchange and SQL over the other two servers.  Specifically, Microsoft does *not* recommend running Exchange on a DC.  Please review some of the best practice recommendations around that.  As far as load, SQL can be a memory hog but it depends on the load on your apps.  Exchange is *always* a memory pig, it will want to essentially consume all available memory.  It will give it up to other apps, but just that operation will tend to make the other apps lag a bit.

David
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a little concerned, when you say &#8216;Windows Business Server&#8217; do you mean Small Business Server (SBS)?  If you were to mean that, that is a whole different ball game.  If you did not mean that, and we are just talking one domain and now all of your servers (all 4, I guess?) are in the same domain, I suggest you arrange it so your least powerful server is your primary DC, that does not typically require much load on a box.  Spread your Exchange and SQL over the other two servers.  Specifically, Microsoft does *not* recommend running Exchange on a DC.  Please review some of the best practice recommendations around that.  As far as load, SQL can be a memory hog but it depends on the load on your apps.  Exchange is *always* a memory pig, it will want to essentially consume all available memory.  It will give it up to other apps, but just that operation will tend to make the other apps lag a bit.</p>
<p>David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: petroleumman</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/what-type-of-migration-is-this/#comment-45203</link>
		<dc:creator>petroleumman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-45203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello,

Yes, you most definitly want to balance your heavy apps by placing SQL and Sharepoint on the 2003 Standard box and make your Enterprise box your DC and Exchange server. This is a must if you desire any kind of performance from your server. SQL and Exchange (both resource hogs) would be a hardware nightmare!

As for your transition, if you plan things right it should be pretty seamless. Essentially, once you have your servers built and on the network, create a plan for each task. Remember with Exchange your going to have to update DNS records (internal/external MX, alias, host etc.)and perform complete mailbox moves from one server to another, SQL will require exporting databases, re-establishing links etc. and same with Sharepoint. make sure to test!!! 

There is a ton of step by step documents available that outline each process so it all goes back to planning. 

Good luck!

]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello,</p>
<p>Yes, you most definitly want to balance your heavy apps by placing SQL and Sharepoint on the 2003 Standard box and make your Enterprise box your DC and Exchange server. This is a must if you desire any kind of performance from your server. SQL and Exchange (both resource hogs) would be a hardware nightmare!</p>
<p>As for your transition, if you plan things right it should be pretty seamless. Essentially, once you have your servers built and on the network, create a plan for each task. Remember with Exchange your going to have to update DNS records (internal/external MX, alias, host etc.)and perform complete mailbox moves from one server to another, SQL will require exporting databases, re-establishing links etc. and same with Sharepoint. make sure to test!!! </p>
<p>There is a ton of step by step documents available that outline each process so it all goes back to planning. </p>
<p>Good luck!</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 0.012 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 296/299 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-05-24 06:45:41 -->