RE: Clustering Exchange

  • From: "Periyasamy, Raj" <Raj.Periyasamy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "[ExchangeList]" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:37:06 -0500

We are running Exch 2000 Active/Active cluster with no problems. What
kind of problems did MS refer to with Active/active cluster ?



-----Original Message-----
From: Callan, Chris [mailto:CCallan@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:27 AM
To: [ExchangeList]
Subject: [exchangelist] Clustering Exchange

Okay, we have been beating our heads around looking for a cluster option
that will work for us, obviously Active/Active was shot down, because of
the memory fragmentation, even though initially MS told us it could be
done, for the meantime we are looking to just go Active/Passive, I was
wondering though what the general consensus on going N+1 is.  We are
going to explore the possibility to go to this, but I wanted to get some
opinions on it first.


List Archives:
Exchange Newsletters:
Exchange FAQ:
ISA Server Resource Site:
Windows Security Resource Site: Windows
2000/NT Fax Solutions:
You are currently subscribed to this Discussion List as:
psraj@xxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send a blank email to

Other related posts: