Quantcast
Channel: Exchange Server 2013 - Setup, Deployment, Updates, and Migration forum
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7129

Sizing requirements and real world best practices Exchange 2013

$
0
0

Greetings all,

Let me first start off by saying I work in an environment where I wear a variety of hats.  Network Administration, System Administration, Infrastructure design and implementation, backups, Email admin(by no means am I an exchange admin, but have recovered from outages etc..).  You name it I do it.  With that said its tough to focus on one area, but at this point I need to.  We currently host Exchange 2007, we have about 230 mailboxes with a 5G quota. Currently we are using about 284 GB of space with regards to our databases.  I am in the process of getting together the sizing requirements for our 2013 Exchange build.

We currently run our exchange servers (1 mailbox server, 1 CAS + HUB) on VMware.  We would like to have our new environment run on VMware as well.   From my research and using the sizing calculator, I am getting a bit confused on best practices. 

I am going to run in a multi-server role configuration for the new build.

Question 1:  Should my logs be on the same volume as my OS?  I prefer to separate this out.  Exchange calculator has recommended the following: 2 volumes for DB's, 4 DB' per volume and 2 volume's for my logs.  I would assume and additional volume for my OS?  This is what I have come up with: 2TB for database volumes, 350 GB for logs, and 120 OS volume. This assumes growth for the next 5 years with 10% growth year over year.

Question 2:  I don't have a separate site but would like to have some form of HA.  When I fill out the calculator and another mailbox server and DAG it appears my volume requirement grows to nearly 7TB.  I expected my size requirements to double for my secondary server and adding a file share witness.  I expected more like a 5TB volume requirement between both servers.  Also, it switches to a 2 volume requirement per server, putting a 1 DB+logs on each volume.  This would make my databases huge.

 What am I missing?  

I feel my implementation being relatively small.  A single mulit-server role configuration is tempting for simplicity, but I feel HA is to good to pass up. 

Thanks for any advice or recommendations

Joe


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7129

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>