|
|
|
date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:05 -0500,
group: microsoft.public.exchange2000.misc
back
Re: setup failover for exchange 2000 or 2003
well, what mangement is asking for is the ability to "roll over" to another
server if the primary one drops.
Some people in management used to work at companies with MUCH larger IT
staff and budget than what we have here, so they cant understand why we dont
have that.
if we did clustering of say two exchange servers, does that require
enterprise edition?
do you have to have separate licenses on each exchange server?
really, I doubt they would ever allow me to purchase and run two exchange
servers, but at least I could quote it out to them and if they say no, hey I
warned ya!
gary
would you
"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
news:433no1dkktdbokp3p7r4un43i7a644fe8u@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:05 -0500, "gary"
> wrote:
>
>>what are my options for setting up failover for exchange 2000 or 2003? (I
>>am
>>hoping I get to purchase 2003 next year)
>>we currently have exchange 2000 standard.
>>
>>I know one way would be to setup a second server with exchange, and if the
>>first one crashes I could restore the last good backup to get exchange
>>running on the second server, but are there other options as well?
>>
> There are a few options. You could use something like DoubleTake for
> this. There are also options to cluser if you have the skillsets in
> your organisation to run one.
>
> It all really depends on what your actual business requirements are
> really.
date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:01:43 -0500
author: gary
Re: setup failover for exchange 2000 or 2003
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:01:43 -0500, "gary"
wrote:
>well, what mangement is asking for is the ability to "roll over" to another
>server if the primary one drops.
>Some people in management used to work at companies with MUCH larger IT
>staff and budget than what we have here, so they cant understand why we dont
>have that.
Well, they're idiots who don't understand busines priorities. You
can't just throw cash at something in a small org.
>
>if we did clustering of say two exchange servers, does that require
>enterprise edition?
Yes indeed.
>
>do you have to have separate licenses on each exchange server?
>
For a cluster yes, you do. For DoubleTake or some other solutions I'm
not sure.
>really, I doubt they would ever allow me to purchase and run two exchange
>servers, but at least I could quote it out to them and if they say no, hey I
>warned ya!
>
>gary
>
>
>would you
>"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
>news:433no1dkktdbokp3p7r4un43i7a644fe8u@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:05 -0500, "gary"
>> wrote:
>>
>>>what are my options for setting up failover for exchange 2000 or 2003? (I
>>>am
>>>hoping I get to purchase 2003 next year)
>>>we currently have exchange 2000 standard.
>>>
>>>I know one way would be to setup a second server with exchange, and if the
>>>first one crashes I could restore the last good backup to get exchange
>>>running on the second server, but are there other options as well?
>>>
>> There are a few options. You could use something like DoubleTake for
>> this. There are also options to cluser if you have the skillsets in
>> your organisation to run one.
>>
>> It all really depends on what your actual business requirements are
>> really.
>
date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:19:46 +0000
author: Mark Arnold [MVP]
Re: setup failover for exchange 2000 or 2003
thanks for the info mark.
gary
"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
news:ptkpo11f0bqd0aqethsac67s5aps628966@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:01:43 -0500, "gary"
> wrote:
>
>>well, what mangement is asking for is the ability to "roll over" to
>>another
>>server if the primary one drops.
>>Some people in management used to work at companies with MUCH larger IT
>>staff and budget than what we have here, so they cant understand why we
>>dont
>>have that.
>
> Well, they're idiots who don't understand busines priorities. You
> can't just throw cash at something in a small org.
>>
>>if we did clustering of say two exchange servers, does that require
>>enterprise edition?
>
> Yes indeed.
>>
>>do you have to have separate licenses on each exchange server?
>>
> For a cluster yes, you do. For DoubleTake or some other solutions I'm
> not sure.
>
>>really, I doubt they would ever allow me to purchase and run two exchange
>>servers, but at least I could quote it out to them and if they say no, hey
>>I
>>warned ya!
>>
>>gary
>>
>>
>>would you
>>"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
>>news:433no1dkktdbokp3p7r4un43i7a644fe8u@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:05 -0500, "gary"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>what are my options for setting up failover for exchange 2000 or 2003?
>>>>(I
>>>>am
>>>>hoping I get to purchase 2003 next year)
>>>>we currently have exchange 2000 standard.
>>>>
>>>>I know one way would be to setup a second server with exchange, and if
>>>>the
>>>>first one crashes I could restore the last good backup to get exchange
>>>>running on the second server, but are there other options as well?
>>>>
>>> There are a few options. You could use something like DoubleTake for
>>> this. There are also options to cluser if you have the skillsets in
>>> your organisation to run one.
>>>
>>> It all really depends on what your actual business requirements are
>>> really.
>>
>
date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 07:51:17 -0500
author: gary
Re: setup failover for exchange 2000 or 2003
do you prefer doubletake over clustering?
would I be correct in assuming that doubletake is cheaper than clustering?
I looked at their website, and the software sounds pretty cool.
gary
"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
news:ptkpo11f0bqd0aqethsac67s5aps628966@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:01:43 -0500, "gary"
> wrote:
>
>>well, what mangement is asking for is the ability to "roll over" to
>>another
>>server if the primary one drops.
>>Some people in management used to work at companies with MUCH larger IT
>>staff and budget than what we have here, so they cant understand why we
>>dont
>>have that.
>
> Well, they're idiots who don't understand busines priorities. You
> can't just throw cash at something in a small org.
>>
>>if we did clustering of say two exchange servers, does that require
>>enterprise edition?
>
> Yes indeed.
>>
>>do you have to have separate licenses on each exchange server?
>>
> For a cluster yes, you do. For DoubleTake or some other solutions I'm
> not sure.
>
>>really, I doubt they would ever allow me to purchase and run two exchange
>>servers, but at least I could quote it out to them and if they say no, hey
>>I
>>warned ya!
>>
>>gary
>>
>>
>>would you
>>"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
>>news:433no1dkktdbokp3p7r4un43i7a644fe8u@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:58:05 -0500, "gary"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>what are my options for setting up failover for exchange 2000 or 2003?
>>>>(I
>>>>am
>>>>hoping I get to purchase 2003 next year)
>>>>we currently have exchange 2000 standard.
>>>>
>>>>I know one way would be to setup a second server with exchange, and if
>>>>the
>>>>first one crashes I could restore the last good backup to get exchange
>>>>running on the second server, but are there other options as well?
>>>>
>>> There are a few options. You could use something like DoubleTake for
>>> this. There are also options to cluser if you have the skillsets in
>>> your organisation to run one.
>>>
>>> It all really depends on what your actual business requirements are
>>> really.
>>
>
date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:15:17 -0500
author: gary
|
|
