Single SCR server to service multiple Exchange 2007 servers

Jon · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 9

I have an enviroment that is looking to have around 3 or 4 Exchange 2007
servers and 10,000 users. I would like to do CCR for all the servers but
cannot convince the powers that be with the money to spend that much on
additional hardware and software. I was wondering if one bulky SCR server
could handle 3 or 4 Exchange 2007 servers constantly pushing their logs and
data to it. The idea is we can have this SCR server and use database
portability in the case of a disaster and this one box could support being
the "clustered" server for all 3 or 4 other servers. I realize this is not a
cluster and it would require manual steps to bring a database up if
necessary. I know every environment is different and a lot of this depends
on how much mail flow we have and how large our databases are etc. I just
wondered if using one SCR instance and sharing it for multiple live Exchange
2007 servers is something people have done and if they have had good results
with it.

Thanks

Archived from group: microsoft>public>exchange>clustering

Scott Schnoll [MSFT] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 89

Let's first step back and focus on the business requirements. That really
should be what drives the solution architecture and design.

What sort of SLAs do you have for the messaging service and data
availability?

What are your RTO and RPO?
--
Regards,

Scott Schnoll
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. Please do not send email directly to this alias. This alias is for
newsgroup purposes only.

"Jon" wrote in message @microsoft.com...
>I have an enviroment that is looking to have around 3 or 4 Exchange 2007
> servers and 10,000 users. I would like to do CCR for all the servers but
> cannot convince the powers that be with the money to spend that much on
> additional hardware and software. I was wondering if one bulky SCR server
> could handle 3 or 4 Exchange 2007 servers constantly pushing their logs
> and
> data to it. The idea is we can have this SCR server and use database
> portability in the case of a disaster and this one box could support being
> the "clustered" server for all 3 or 4 other servers. I realize this is
> not a
> cluster and it would require manual steps to bring a database up if
> necessary. I know every environment is different and a lot of this
> depends
> on how much mail flow we have and how large our databases are etc. I just
> wondered if using one SCR instance and sharing it for multiple live
> Exchange
> 2007 servers is something people have done and if they have had good
> results
> with it.
>
> Thanks

Jon · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 9

I understand where you are coming from but the organization I work for, as
large as they are, does not have much of that kind of information available
and they don't seem overly concerned by the idea of an Exchange server being
down for a while (although that story will change when the time comes I'm
afraid). As it sits now they do not want to spend any extra money on
redundancy or fault tolerance and this was my idea of something that I could
attempt to sell them on where it would be the lowest cost to have some type
of "poor man's clustering" in our environment and cover all our
servers/databases. I am not accustomed to being in an environment where they
do not deem Exchange to be critical enough to put money into good redundancy
configurations. It's been a struggle so far.

I actually just watched your demos on the Exchange blog site about an hour
before I posted this so it was funny to see you reply to this. Great job
with that. The Exchange blog site is the best site ever for Exchange admins.
Thanks for all the info that you all contribute there.

"Scott Schnoll [MSFT]" wrote:

> Let's first step back and focus on the business requirements. That really
> should be what drives the solution architecture and design.
>
> What sort of SLAs do you have for the messaging service and data
> availability?
>
> What are your RTO and RPO?
> --
> Regards,
>
> Scott Schnoll
> Microsoft Corporation
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights. Please do not send email directly to this alias. This alias is for
> newsgroup purposes only.
>
>
> "Jon" wrote in message
> @microsoft.com...
> >I have an enviroment that is looking to have around 3 or 4 Exchange 2007
> > servers and 10,000 users. I would like to do CCR for all the servers but
> > cannot convince the powers that be with the money to spend that much on
> > additional hardware and software. I was wondering if one bulky SCR server
> > could handle 3 or 4 Exchange 2007 servers constantly pushing their logs
> > and
> > data to it. The idea is we can have this SCR server and use database
> > portability in the case of a disaster and this one box could support being
> > the "clustered" server for all 3 or 4 other servers. I realize this is
> > not a
> > cluster and it would require manual steps to bring a database up if
> > necessary. I know every environment is different and a lot of this
> > depends
> > on how much mail flow we have and how large our databases are etc. I just
> > wondered if using one SCR instance and sharing it for multiple live
> > Exchange
> > 2007 servers is something people have done and if they have had good
> > results
> > with it.
> >
> > Thanks
>
>

Scott Schnoll [MSFT] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 89

Thanks for the followup info and the kind words.

What messaging system are you using now, and what sort of downtime have you
experienced in the past? There's so much more that can go wrong than just a
server being down. What about storage or other hardware failures? What
about facilities failures (power, cooling, etc.)? What about the biggest
cause of failures of all - human error?

Sounds like from your post that you're the admin in charge of designing and
implementing the solution. Part of your job (as you probably know) is to
help educate the decision makers and set the expectations on the services
provided by the solution (e.g., availability, uptime, etc., etc.). The core
tenet of Exchange HA is to introduce redundancy throughout the environment.
And it is the business needs that drive the design of the overall HA
solution.

In your organization, it sounds like you're saying the decision makers have
decided that, although you have a lot of mailboxes, access to mail data or
the ability to send/receive messages is not that critical for your users.
If you're running Exchange now (e.g., Exchange 2003, etc.) then you may be
able to get good usage statistics by collection a variety of performance
counters. If you're not running Exchange, there still might be counters you
can collect. Of course, if you have no messaging system now, then you might
not know readily know what the specific availability needs are and will have
to wait and see.

BTW, one comment on your design of 3-4 servers and using CCR. When you
deploy CCR, that will be two of your servers. That would leave you one or
two servers for the Client Access and Hub Transport roles. If you only have
one server for CAS/Hub, then you've got a bad single point of failure. If
that server goes down you lose mail flow, and much, if not all, client
access.
--
Regards,

Scott Schnoll
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. Please do not send email directly to this alias. This alias is for
newsgroup purposes only.

"Jon" wrote in message @microsoft.com...
>I understand where you are coming from but the organization I work for, as
> large as they are, does not have much of that kind of information
> available
> and they don't seem overly concerned by the idea of an Exchange server
> being
> down for a while (although that story will change when the time comes I'm
> afraid). As it sits now they do not want to spend any extra money on
> redundancy or fault tolerance and this was my idea of something that I
> could
> attempt to sell them on where it would be the lowest cost to have some
> type
> of "poor man's clustering" in our environment and cover all our
> servers/databases. I am not accustomed to being in an environment where
> they
> do not deem Exchange to be critical enough to put money into good
> redundancy
> configurations. It's been a struggle so far.
>
> I actually just watched your demos on the Exchange blog site about an hour
> before I posted this so it was funny to see you reply to this. Great job
> with that. The Exchange blog site is the best site ever for Exchange
> admins.
> Thanks for all the info that you all contribute there.
>
> "Scott Schnoll [MSFT]" wrote:
>
>> Let's first step back and focus on the business requirements. That
>> really
>> should be what drives the solution architecture and design.
>>
>> What sort of SLAs do you have for the messaging service and data
>> availability?
>>
>> What are your RTO and RPO?
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Scott Schnoll
>> Microsoft Corporation
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights. Please do not send email directly to this alias. This alias is
>> for
>> newsgroup purposes only.
>>
>>
>> "Jon" wrote in message
>> @microsoft.com...
>> >I have an enviroment that is looking to have around 3 or 4 Exchange 2007
>> > servers and 10,000 users. I would like to do CCR for all the servers
>> > but
>> > cannot convince the powers that be with the money to spend that much on
>> > additional hardware and software. I was wondering if one bulky SCR
>> > server
>> > could handle 3 or 4 Exchange 2007 servers constantly pushing their logs
>> > and
>> > data to it. The idea is we can have this SCR server and use database
>> > portability in the case of a disaster and this one box could support
>> > being
>> > the "clustered" server for all 3 or 4 other servers. I realize this is
>> > not a
>> > cluster and it would require manual steps to bring a database up if
>> > necessary. I know every environment is different and a lot of this
>> > depends
>> > on how much mail flow we have and how large our databases are etc. I
>> > just
>> > wondered if using one SCR instance and sharing it for multiple live
>> > Exchange
>> > 2007 servers is something people have done and if they have had good
>> > results
>> > with it.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>>

multiple POP3 virtual servers in a cluster Can I have multiple POP3 virtual servers on an Exchange 2003 cluster? I am trying to create 2 pop3 virtual servers, one regular over port 110, and the other secure over 995 with an SSL certificate. I created the first pop3 virtual server and the correspon

Exchange 2007 Single Copy Cluster Problem Dear All, I need help in Exchange 2007 SCC. Pls help me to resolve the below issue. Problem details - I am having issues with my 2007 Exchange cluster. The Cluster PC is not associating correctly with the cluster that is setup. According to windows clus

Client Access Server & Hub Transport Server Exchange 2007 Hello, Does anyone know if I can load both "Client Access Server" and " Hub Transport Server" on two servers and then network load balance these? Thanks SMT

Exchange 2007 server roles You guys like servers! In exchange 2003 we can get away with 2 x backend clustered servers and a couple of front ends, = 4 servers for reasonable high availability In exchange 2007, we have two mailbox servers clustered, and other server roles (hub, clien

Cluster service could not join an existing server cluster Hi, We have x2 blade servers running Windows 2003 SP1 Enterprise Server edition. They each have a dual qlogic HBA attached to a MSA1500. We presented a LUN for the quorum drive and proceeded to install / configure MS Cluster. Cluster install went fine. Wh