Server Question

Hi, If i were to buy one file/print server then after a period of time i ran
out of space on that server, could i just buy another one, put it on the
same domain and the two file/print servers would share the users files and
everything on the network without problems or would i need a "cluster"? or
am i missing something? and then if they ran out, just buy more and more?

I just dont understand why some people have multiple servers in racks,
I know this must seem extremely basic to you but i just would like to
understand networks fully before i go ahead on building one.


Thankyou

> Hi, If i were to buy one file/print server then after a period of time i
> ran out of space on that server, could i just buy another one, put it on
> the same domain and the two file/print servers would share the users files
> and everything on the network without problems


Yes you could. You could also add more disks to your existing server,
attach the server to a SAN or server attached storage.

Clusters?
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_cluster



> I just dont understand why some people have multiple servers in racks,

Most likely it's performance based. 3 servers in a cluster are more able to
handle 8 thousand users hitting it.

Exchange is a resource hog. An Exchange server for 20 users is more able to
handle another service being run on it than an Exchange server for 300
users. It also depends on how much of a resource hog the other service is.

hth
DDS

"TH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:C3E2784F-7323-4B19-B134-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, If i were to buy one file/print server then after a period of time i
> ran out of space on that server, could i just buy another one, put it on
> the same domain and the two file/print servers would share the users files
> and everything on the network without problems or would i need a
> "cluster"? or am i missing something? and then if they ran out, just buy
> more and more?
>
> I just dont understand why some people have multiple servers in racks,
> I know this must seem extremely basic to you but i just would like to
> understand networks fully before i go ahead on building one.
>
>
> Thankyou
>

"TH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:C3E2784F-7323-4B19-B134-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, If i were to buy one file/print server then after a period of time i
> ran out of space on that server, could i just buy another one, put it on
> the same domain and the two file/print servers would share the users files
> and everything on the network without problems or would i need a
> "cluster"? or am i missing something? and then if they ran out, just buy
> more and more?
>
> I just dont understand why some people have multiple servers in racks,
> I know this must seem extremely basic to you but i just would like to
> understand networks fully before i go ahead on building one.
>
>
> Thankyou
>

Try http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...ew/dfsfaq.mspx

Wayne McGlinn
Brisbane, Oz

TH wrote:
> Hi, If i were to buy one file/print server then after a period of time i
> ran out of space on that server, could i just buy another one, put it on
> the same domain and the two file/print servers would share the users
> files and everything on the network without problems or would i need a
> "cluster"? or am i missing something? and then if they ran out, just buy
> more and more?
>
> I just dont understand why some people have multiple servers in racks,
> I know this must seem extremely basic to you but i just would like to
> understand networks fully before i go ahead on building one.
>
>
> Thankyou
>

File serving doesn't place much of a load on the server CPU and RAM...
but it can be a burden on the network connections and disk subsystems.
Yes, you could add servers to "lighten" the load, or you could upgrade
or add disks - even external disks through Direct Attach Storage (DAS)
or a Storage Area Network (SAN). But you need to keep performance in
mind when you do this - performance from the network interface(s) and
the overall disk subsystem.

Windows File Sharing clusters are fine - they require shared storage but
do not necessarily distribute the load... one server handles all the
requests until and unless it fails, then the other server quickly takes
over (in theory, the user doesn't notice the failure).

In an idea world, you would have one server per service - that's why you
would have multiple servers. In part, this would be to load balance, in
part, this would be so that if you had to restart a server - or if one
server failed - you didn't have to interrupt other services. In
reality, this can be incredibly expensive. So it's not uncommon to
combine some services into one system, like DHCP, DNS, and AD - and if
you're a smaller business, it's not uncommon to put all services into
one system (Small Business Server 2003, for example).