Moving a 2-node Exchange cluster to different hardware
Hello,
I'm running a 2-node active/passive Exchange 2003 cluster, and the servers are about to reach end-of-life, so I need to move the cluster to a different pair of servers. I'm assuming the easiest way to do this is to add the new servers as nodes 3 &
4 of the cluster, then remove nodes 1 & 2 (the original servers) from the cluster. Is this correct? Any drawbacks or gotchas of doing it this way?
Exchange 2003 Enterprise SP2
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP2
Thanks in advance,
Charles
August 4th, 2010 12:04am
Actually, and speaking purely for myself, what I would do is to create a brand new cluster and do mailbox moves to it. You get the advantage of leaving all the old clutter behind and starting afresh. It's arguably safer that was as
well even if it will take a little longer.
"charles-k" wrote in message
news:dd23e8dd-a1b7-4e71-8916-f2fe5612a1d4...
Hello,
I'm running a 2-node active/passive Exchange 2003 cluster, and the servers are about to reach end-of-life, so I need to move the cluster to a different pair of servers. I'm assuming the easiest way to do this is to add the new servers as nodes 3 &
4 of the cluster, then remove nodes 1 & 2 (the original servers) from the cluster. Is this correct? Any drawbacks or gotchas of doing it this way?
Exchange 2003 Enterprise SP2
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP2
Thanks in advance,
Charles
Mark Arnold, Exchange MVP.
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
August 4th, 2010 9:24pm
Actually, and speaking purely for myself, what I would do is to create a brand new cluster and do mailbox moves to it. You get the advantage of leaving all the old clutter behind and starting afresh. It's arguably safer
that was as well even if it will take a little longer.
Have to say that is what I would do as well.
If I get the chance to rebuild an environment that has been around a while, then I will grab it with both hands. It will make a much more reliable environment as well, clean databases, correct any configuration or database design issues etc. Take the opportunity
to review the entire design.
Simon.Simon Butler, Exchange MVP. http://blog.sembee.co.uk , http://exbpa.com/
August 4th, 2010 11:32pm
Thanks for your responses. What you're saying makes sense, and the thought of creating a new cluster does hold appeal for me. However, I'm in a situation where I need to get the cluster off of the current hardware very quickly, and given that
I have 2000 mailboxes, I don't think I'll have enough time to move the mailboxes to a new cluster on time. So given this scenario, do you see any inherent problems with adding the 3rd and 4th nodes to the existing cluster, then removing nodes 1 &
2? Thanks again.
Charles
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
August 5th, 2010 1:00am
Hello,
well, we can try this, though this is not a recomended solution.
evict one node, Uninstall exchange and cluster service from that node, install a new exchange server on this node and add it to the existing exchange organization and move mailboxes.Arun Kumar | MCSE:W2K3 + Messaging | MCTS:Exchange 2007 | MCTS:OCS 2007 R2 | ITIL-F V3
August 5th, 2010 1:15am
How much time are you talking about?
Days, weeks?
If you have a week, then it shouldn't be a problem, even a long weekend it should be possible to move the bulk of the content across.
Simon.Simon Butler, Exchange MVP. http://blog.sembee.co.uk , http://exbpa.com/
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
August 5th, 2010 1:19am
Building a new environment and moving everything is best (and it would also be a good time to upgrade to a newer version of Exchange :) ) but it would require double the storage you are using now, at least temporarily. Something to think about.
I've done something similar to your cluster dance and I can't think of any issues.
August 5th, 2010 2:12am
Two thousand users can be shifted in a very short space of time. You could do the whole lot in a weekend so long as you kept on top of the backups to prevent the logs LUN filling up. There are no inherent problems in bringing up nodes
3 and 4, it's just not what any of us would do and if four people are telling you that a new cluster is the way to go you might want to dwell on that.
The post about evicting a node and bringing new nodes in one at a time isn't the end of the world either, that would let you keep the same machine names. Maybe don't even evict the node, just shut it down, put the new one in and "repair"
the node. Same everything. That's one other option.
Bottom line? Create a new cluster and spend the weekend migrating.
"charles-k" wrote in message
news:e0777704-c2fd-4d62-8417-7d5845195ad3...
Thanks for your responses. What you're saying makes sense, and the thought of creating a new cluster does hold appeal for me. However, I'm in a situation where I need to get the cluster off of the current hardware very quickly, and given that
I have 2000 mailboxes, I don't think I'll have enough time to move the mailboxes to a new cluster on time. So given this scenario, do you see any inherent problems with adding the 3rd and 4th nodes to the existing cluster, then removing nodes 1 &
2? Thanks again.
Charles
Mark Arnold, Exchange MVP.
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
August 5th, 2010 2:20am