RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange now supported on virtual hardware

  • From: "Medeiros, Jose" <jmedeiros@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:14:16 -0700

Hmm.. I agree with it be used for testing purposes in VMWARE or in Virtual 
server, but not in a I/O intensive enviroment where you have several hundred 
users.

Sincerely, 
Jose Medeiros
ADP | National Account Services
ProBusiness Division | Information Services
925.737.7967 | 408-449-6621 CELL




-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Susan Bradley,
CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:52 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; # Jose Medeiros-IBM (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange now supported on virtual hardware


Ultimate bare metal restore capability on any hardware comes to mind  :-)
Ultimate Patch rollback.....
Supported imaging of a SBS/DC?  :-)  While we don't have UNC rollback 
issues because of our single DC, the threat of getting that box back 
online as soon as you can for a small firm.

Read this -- http://msmvps.com/bradley/archive/2005/10/25/72869.aspx

In the wake of Katrina, Rita, Wilma...think about it.....

We have a few SBSers that are Vserver'ing a TS box under a SBS on beefy 
hardware.

Honestly I had more issues with MSDE instances sucking up and not 
letting go than I did with Exchange.  I'm not worried about Exchange on 
my DC.  If I get any more apps asking to put an MSDE instance on my 
server, Brett's Jet's databases will be outnumbered.  IMHO MSDE is the 
'suckage' I'm worried about.

Medeiros, Jose wrote:
> Hi Tony, 
>
> I have to respond to this. Many IT managers think you can just virtualize any 
> application because of all the marketing hype. Be very careful, I/O is 
> critical to Exchange and any other database application which may make 
> running it on VMWARE or VIRTUAL SERVER unpractical not to mention Exchange is 
> also very resource intensive and will take whatever it can. Now I am sure if 
> you have a very small environment that it may make sense, but with Microsoft 
> Small Business server why would you want to?
>
> Any body else car to throw in there two cents?
>
> Sincerely,
> Jose Medeiros
> ADP | National Account Services
> ProBusiness Division | Information Services
> 925.737.7967 | 408-449-6621 CELL
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tony Murray
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:49 PM
> To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] Exchange now supported on virtual hardware
>
>
> Microsoft has introduced support for Exchange 2003 SP2 and later on Virtual 
> Server 2005 R2.  This article has just been released.
>  
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;320220
>  
> I guess this means we can now run a DC and Exchange on the same physical 
> hardware without any of the previous limitations.
>  
> Tony
>
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
>
>   

-- 
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?  
http://www.threatcode.com

List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/



Other related posts: