Another prime example of how in the Microsoft world that Microsoft giveth with one hand and taketh with the other...

Everything else about the Exchange 2010 storage story pushes the costs of high availability down--it's possible to use commodity hardware (SATA in some cases), no SAN, no RAID, etc. But we went from having the ability in Exchange 2007 to do replication on Windows Standard Edition with SCR and LCR (in combination with one another if desired) to having no HA or replication solution natively available on Windows Standard Edition in Exchange 2010.
In other words, Microsoft is pushing customers to deploy Exchange 2010 on Windows Server Enterprise edition -- which costs 4x Windows Server standard edition at list price.  Multiply out for all the various Exchange 2010 roles, directory catalogs, and of course multiple servers in a cluster, and things add up fast.

The premise of the article itself is interesting -- Lotus Domino clustering for years has offered an architecture where you could consider going without backups, because every clustered server had an identical copy of each NSF.  For that matter, even the local NSF on a replicated Notes client was the same (the one time I ever had a server mailbox corruption, it was faster to replicate my local NSF back up to the server than it was to pull from a backup).  It's interesting to see that admin philosophy has changed in a way that this is now even in the realm of conception and possibility.

Link: Windows IT Pro: More on Going Backup-less with Exchange 2010 > (Thanks, Russ and Chris)

Post a Comment