Hello, Can someone give his opinion about the following : a company with 20 users. Windows 2012 Standard Core which acts as Hyper-V host. Virtualisations : Windows 2012 DC Windows 2008r2 with Exchange 2010 SP2 Windows 2012 for remote desktop services. Hardware : ML350G8p - 1 processor -Xeon E5-2609 2.4 Ghz 32 GB 3 x 600 GB disks (raid 5) HP LTO3 Ultrium 920 SAS : backup of the Hyper-v with Symantec Backup Exec. F-secure Small Business Suite with policy manager for protection Thanks. nour din

Hi, you can be sure that the hardware can support Windows server 2012 here http://windowsservercatalog.com/item.aspx?idItem=726a38a1-7f2a-42c9-dae4-a600b0620051&bCatID=1333 Best regards Bourbita Thameur Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist: Windows Server 2008 R2,Server Virtualizaton

Thanks for the information Thameur. I found also this : http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c03305495/c03305495.pdf nour din

Hiya, The things that spring into my mind: 1: The CPU doesn't leave much processing power. 4 cores for Host, DC and Exchange should be ok however with Remote Desktop services, you could have a problem. It depends on the planned usage for the RDS solution. 2: The disk setup, could be a problem, however I wouldn't think so with just 20 users. 3: No file, print, DHCP, server? (the answer could change the above 1 and 2) 4: Why LTO3? (LTO5 is from 2010)

Thanks Jesper, 1. RDS only for use of internet explorer and office 2010 (max. 5 users at the same time). 2. Why disk setup is a problem ? We will have 1.2 TB of storage capacity I thought : 130 Gb for each operating system 200 GB for maildatabase(s) 600 GB files. For extra storage (archiving, media-files,...) we will also use a NAS. 3. Dc is also file, print, dhcp, wsus, 4.LTO3 which is delivered as an add-on to the ml350g8 changing to LTO5 would be too expensive. nour din

Hiya, 1: Then you need more processing power(CPU). IE is relatively CPU intensive. 2: Not disk size, but disk speed. I don't know how fast your planned disks are? 3: I would split out DC, DHCP, DNS and File, Print and WSUS. You don't want your DC to die, when your printspooler starts to act up :) 3: Depending on which NAS your going for, you could place your VM's on that, if it supports ISCSI? 4: Well, hopefully you got paid for that :P - LTO3 is from 2005. It works, however it just doesn't have the same specifications as the later versions. It might be worth to consider an online backup provider? - depending on line speed, country, location etc. 6: Why not go for the DL380 model instead?

Jesper, 1 We were thinking indeed of adding a second processor. 2 disks are 6G 10000 rpm enterprise 3 do you advice to put file, print and wsus on exchange or on rds server ? 4 online bakup is also too expensive. Tape drive is an hp E847B (with new ROHS comptability) and windows 2012 and symantec backup exec 2012 compatible drivers ? Why do you think this would be a problem ? Thanks a lot ! nour din

Hiya, 2: With 20 users, it shouldn't be a problem. 3: Hmm... Good question. I just had a look at the changed licensing model for Server 2012 and that have changed a bit. I presume its 1 Standard with 2 Virtual Instances. (DC & RDS) and then an additional license for 2008R2 standard My thought was running a 2008 R2 Core Enterprise edition (Gives you 5 licenses for virtual machines) - Then you wouldn't be in any extra charge for additional server(s) Life cycle is: Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise Start:10/22/2009 Mainstream:1/13/2015 Extended:1/14/2020 DC, Exchange or RDS.. Well.. I wouldn't place it on RDS due to security and users, I wouldn't place it on DC due to single point of failure for the domain and I wouldn't place it on Exchange as the usage patterns just dont match, that leaves me with. I would create a fourth server... 4: My only concern was that LTO3 is old, thus the cost per tape would go up, due to storage. It depends on how much data your client expects to backup and the growth of that.

all looks good except the processors... you intend to run 3 server VM's with a min OS of 2k8R2. as proposed by Jesper... increase the cores and you should be good to go.

Hello, we changed our configuration : HP ML350G with one xeon e5-2620 (6 cores) instead of a 2609. Is this enough to run the 4 VM's like suggested above by Jesper ? LTO4 Ultrium (HP1760 SAS tape drive) instead of LTO3. nour din

Hiya, Its better than 4 cores, but not as good as 8 cores. It will really depend on your RDS usage, which is very hard to predict.

Hiya, Its better than 4 cores, but not as good as 8 cores. It will really depend on your RDS usage, which is very hard to predict.