Looking to get some input on this configuration, more the software side of it. Hardware:Cluster nodes I am looking at are Dell PE R610 with pair of Intel X5550 Xeon 2.66GHz (quad cores, 8 cores total). 48GB of 1333MHz memory (upgrade to96MBin about 1-2 years) and dual 4GB Fiber Channel (upgrade to 8GB FC in about a year) going to an EMC CX4-120 SAN. The SAN will also have 450GB FC drives at 15K RPM with dual controllers with 8GB of cache each.Software:OS = Server 2008 in Cluster configurationSoftware = SQL 2008 and Exchange 2007Load:SQL tables = about 900GB total between 8-15 DatabasesExchange stores = about 146GB total (all mailbox [4] and public stores[1])Users = about 400 plus BlackBerry Enterprise ServerMy DBA is pleading not to run SQL and Exhange on the same host, and I can understand his reasons. But this hardware is so powerful (all 64 bit with 8 cores), and the EMC so costly, that I would like to share the resources for some period of time.Latter I can budget for a separate Cluster on the same SAN to host the Exchange, and add some file and printer shares.My question has more to do with the pitfals/downfalls/performance hits/issues with running both SQL 2008 and Exchange 2007 on the same Server 2008 host. Any input from anyone? Any "first-hand" knowledge to throw my way? Please mention if what you have is an opinion or first-hand experience, if first-hand please mention some hardware specs you were implementing on.Thank you much,David Bencic

HI, I assuming you need to use your High end server for testing for some period of time. I suggest to uses Windows Hyper-V and install Exchange 2007 on it then you can test Exchange 2007 Separately from SQL server. Exchange Server 2007 and Hyper-V----------------------------------------------http://blogs.technet.com/scottschnoll/archive/2008/06/15/exchange-server-2007-and-hyper-v.aspx Virtualization with Hyper-V---------------------------------http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-main.aspx RegardsChinthaka

I think you are looking for trouble with that type of configuration. Straight from the documentation. Running SQL Server on the same computer as a production Exchange mailbox server is not recommended. Both SQL Server and Exchange mailbox servers consume a large amount of memory and disk resources to operate optimally. Co-hosting SQL Server and Exchange Server on the same computer in a production environment will likely lead to poor performance by one or both of the servers. Additionally, troubleshooting and securing such an installation is not well understood. Finally, there are a number of known interoperability issues that you may encounter if you are running SQL Server and Exchange Server on the same computer. Most of these issues are the result of version inconsistencies with files or programs common to the two servers, such as Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC), Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects (ADO), and OLE Database (OLE DB). http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa997379.aspx You are better off running Hyper-V or VMWare ESX and separating those hosts from each other. Mark Morowczynski|MCT| MCSE 2003:Messaging, Security|MCITP:ES, SA,EA|MCTS:Windows Mobile Admin|Security+|http://almostdailytech.com

More comments in this thread