John Fontana reports from TechEd last week....

"We had our routing [service] on a cluster and now it needs to go somewhere else, and that means more servers," says Christopher Wenzel, applications analyst for the law firm of Katten Muchin and Rosemann. Wenzel, who has clusters running in four of his five Exchange sites around the United States, noted that best practice guidance from Microsoft for Exchange 2003 was to cluster servers. "In the past, the idea was server consolidation, but not anymore. Now it is scaling out again. My footprint increases in that I need more servers and more money for licensing [Exchange and Windows]."

Microsoft has yet to release licensing option requirements for Exchange 2007.

He also says the new Clustered Continuous Replication, which allows for geographically dispersed "clusters" and prevents against site failures, may be more than he wants. "Most of my outages are not site failures. I don't want Exchange to fail over from Los Angeles to Chicago."
It will be interesting to see the practicality of the Exchange 2007 model.  Funny that the reaction to hot-site clustering was so negative -- I've had to think about that concept for the entirety of my IT career.

Link: Network World: Exchange 2007 will shake up messaging >

Post a Comment