I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
for partitioning a Small Business Server.

When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have read
recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a different
partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather than enhance
performance.

I was interested to find this on the HP website
http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0

Is this a good idea ?
I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want to
start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS and
Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system with a
hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions are
acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
advantages.

Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order to
be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary anyway
and if so at what intervals?

1 obvious thing people forget. If you use 4GB of RAM in the server, you
need 8GB of paging file and max size per partition is 4GB so if you have 2
partitions then you have to account for a 4GB pagefile on C which drops your
15GB to 11GB. Some people thing 4GB is overkill but anything over 5 users
if you run SBS Premium (and we setup Sharepoint with SQL and ISA, etc) then
4GB is barely enough as you add more users.


"Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>
> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have read
> recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a different
> partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather than enhance
> performance.
>
> I was interested to find this on the HP website
> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>
> Is this a good idea ?
> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want to
> start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS and
> Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system with a
> hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions are
> acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
> advantages.
>
> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order to
> be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary anyway
> and if so at what intervals?
>

Arthur Realize of course your topic you are bringing up is of a "Religious"
nature
Meaning everyone has different Beliefs.
(Some call it ignorance, but I call it's Beliefs)

I couldn't get to that link, I got an error so I can't comment on that.

I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS partition)
I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself

For a Entry level system (Here comes the flames)
I like SATA Drives, Cheap Fast Large
You could get 4 drives (RAID1 Two Sets)
(Say 4 300GB or 4 500GB Drives)

That would get you IMO best Bang for Buck (That's a US term Hopefully won't
offend anyone)

Then you can create your Partitions out of that.

Russ


--
Russell Grover
SBITS.Biz
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
support @ SBITS.Biz
Remote SBS2003 Support
http://www.SBITS.Biz



"Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>
> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have read
> recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a different
> partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather than enhance
> performance.
>
> I was interested to find this on the HP website
> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>
> Is this a good idea ?
> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want to
> start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS and
> Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system with a
> hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions are
> acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
> advantages.
>
> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order to
> be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary anyway
> and if so at what intervals?
>

i have one machine with a 15gb primary partition and after a year of updates
it is almost full. i regret doing that. with another machine at a
different location i went for a 25gb primary partition and so far that seems
ok with about 10gb of free space after a year of updates. both of these
examples have 2gb of ram as they are just file servers (exchange not
running). but if i were to do it again i would not make the primary
partition less than 30gb. this of course assumes that you are going to
relocate the exchange database to a alternate partition. good luck.

"Russ - SBITS.Biz (MCP SBS)" <support@REMOVETHIS.sbits.biz> wrote in message
news:uSs29NfIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Arthur Realize of course your topic you are bringing up is of a
> "Religious" nature
> Meaning everyone has different Beliefs.
> (Some call it ignorance, but I call it's Beliefs)
>
> I couldn't get to that link, I got an error so I can't comment on that.
>
> I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS partition)
> I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself
>
> For a Entry level system (Here comes the flames)
> I like SATA Drives, Cheap Fast Large
> You could get 4 drives (RAID1 Two Sets)
> (Say 4 300GB or 4 500GB Drives)
>
> That would get you IMO best Bang for Buck (That's a US term Hopefully
> won't offend anyone)
>
> Then you can create your Partitions out of that.
>
> Russ
>
>
> --
> Russell Grover
> SBITS.Biz
> Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
> support @ SBITS.Biz
> Remote SBS2003 Support
> http://www.SBITS.Biz
>
>
>
> "Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>>
>> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
>> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
>> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
>> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have
>> read recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a
>> different partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather
>> than enhance performance.
>>
>> I was interested to find this on the HP website
>> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>>
>> Is this a good idea ?
>> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want
>> to start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS
>> and Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system
>> with a hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions
>> are acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
>> advantages.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order
>> to be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary
>> anyway and if so at what intervals?
>>
>
>

I got an error when I went back to that link too.
Try this
http://tinyurl.com/ydpd4c
Then go to the preconfigured solutions - 50 User SATA

"Russ - SBITS.Biz (MCP SBS)" <support@REMOVETHIS.sbits.biz> wrote in message
news:uSs29NfIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Arthur Realize of course your topic you are bringing up is of a
> "Religious" nature
> Meaning everyone has different Beliefs.
> (Some call it ignorance, but I call it's Beliefs)
>
> I couldn't get to that link, I got an error so I can't comment on that.
>
> I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS partition)
> I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself
>
> For a Entry level system (Here comes the flames)
> I like SATA Drives, Cheap Fast Large
> You could get 4 drives (RAID1 Two Sets)
> (Say 4 300GB or 4 500GB Drives)
>
> That would get you IMO best Bang for Buck (That's a US term Hopefully
> won't offend anyone)
>
> Then you can create your Partitions out of that.
>
> Russ
>
>
> --
> Russell Grover
> SBITS.Biz
> Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
> support @ SBITS.Biz
> Remote SBS2003 Support
> http://www.SBITS.Biz
>
>
>
> "Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>>
>> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
>> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
>> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
>> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have
>> read recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a
>> different partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather
>> than enhance performance.
>>
>> I was interested to find this on the HP website
>> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>>
>> Is this a good idea ?
>> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want
>> to start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS
>> and Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system
>> with a hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions
>> are acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
>> advantages.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order
>> to be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary
>> anyway and if so at what intervals?
>>
>
>

"Russ - SBITS.Biz (MCP SBS)" <support@REMOVETHIS.sbits.biz> wrote in message
news:uSs29NfIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Arthur Realize of course your topic you are bringing up is of a
> "Religious" nature
> Meaning everyone has different Beliefs.
> (Some call it ignorance, but I call it's Beliefs)
Yes I realise that there are many differing views.

>
> I couldn't get to that link, I got an error so I can't comment on that.
See previous post

>
> I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS partition)
> I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself
For what reason ?

>
> For a Entry level system (Here comes the flames)
> I like SATA Drives, Cheap Fast Large
> You could get 4 drives (RAID1 Two Sets)
> (Say 4 300GB or 4 500GB Drives)
>
> That would get you IMO best Bang for Buck (That's a US term Hopefully
> won't offend anyone)
":o)

>
> Then you can create your Partitions out of that.
How would you do this ?

>
> Russ
>
>
> --
> Russell Grover
> SBITS.Biz
> Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
> support @ SBITS.Biz
> Remote SBS2003 Support
> http://www.SBITS.Biz
>
>
>
> "Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>>
>> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
>> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
>> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
>> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have
>> read recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a
>> different partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather
>> than enhance performance.
>>
>> I was interested to find this on the HP website
>> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>>
>> Is this a good idea ?
>> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want
>> to start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS
>> and Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system
>> with a hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions
>> are acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
>> advantages.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order
>> to be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary
>> anyway and if so at what intervals?
>>
>
>

There are no set in stone rules for partitioning a server or how many drives
and how to configure them. It all depends on how the server will be used,
budget, and personal preference of the installer. That said I have two
comments. 80 GB drives are ludicrously small in today's market. The price
difference between an 80 GB drive and a 250 GB drive is spare change. Given
that you will be using larger than 80 GB drives why worry about it. Allocate
at least 40 GB to the system partition and forget about it. It is overkill
but it will be one less thing to worry about for the next few years. It is
absolutely silly to try and squeeze every last bit of space out of a small
drive these days. Buy drives much larger than you think you need and spend
your time worrying about things that matter like security, backups, uptime,
etc..

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2


"Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>
> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have read
> recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a different
> partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather than enhance
> performance.
>
> I was interested to find this on the HP website
> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>
> Is this a good idea ?
> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want to
> start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS and
> Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system with a
> hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions are
> acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
> advantages.
>
> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order to
> be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary anyway
> and if so at what intervals?
>

>> I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS
>> partition)
>> I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself
> For what reason ?

Well User Files you typically want Shadow Copy Turned on.
(And I don't like to turn on Shadow Copy on the partition that has Exchange)

>>
>> Then you can create your Partitions out of that.
> How would you do this ?

Here we go on "Religion again"

For 1 thing IMO it depends on what size of drives you have and what your
Business NEEDs are.
Sorry without some Specifics I really can't say.
But, OS, Exchange, DATA (Some like partition for Page file.)
What size is dependant on your situation,
The only standard I keep IMO is the OS Partition.

I see the PC now.
(note I say PC not Server)

They are trying to Sell a Server with a P4
512MB ram with 80GB of space for 50 People

In Gods Green Earth WHY WHY WHY WHY.

This is not a Server it's a PC
(The only thing I see right in that configuration is RAID1)
But you'd still put two more 300 or 500GB SATA Drives in it, IMO

Russ

--
Russell Grover
SBITS.Biz
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
support @ SBITS.Biz
Remote SBS2003 Support
http://www.SBITS.Biz



"Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:%23FwxUefIHHA.3676@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I got an error when I went back to that link too.
> Try this
> http://tinyurl.com/ydpd4c
> Then go to the preconfigured solutions - 50 User SATA
>
> "Russ - SBITS.Biz (MCP SBS)" <support@REMOVETHIS.sbits.biz> wrote in
> message news:uSs29NfIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Arthur Realize of course your topic you are bringing up is of a
>> "Religious" nature
>> Meaning everyone has different Beliefs.
>> (Some call it ignorance, but I call it's Beliefs)
>>
>> I couldn't get to that link, I got an error so I can't comment on that.
>>
>> I personally like at least 20GB Min (I've been building 30GB OS
>> partition)
>> I don't like User files and Exchange on the same partition myself
>>
>> For a Entry level system (Here comes the flames)
>> I like SATA Drives, Cheap Fast Large
>> You could get 4 drives (RAID1 Two Sets)
>> (Say 4 300GB or 4 500GB Drives)
>>
>> That would get you IMO best Bang for Buck (That's a US term Hopefully
>> won't offend anyone)
>>
>> Then you can create your Partitions out of that.
>>
>> Russ
>>
>>
>> --
>> Russell Grover
>> SBITS.Biz
>> Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
>> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
>> support @ SBITS.Biz
>> Remote SBS2003 Support
>> http://www.SBITS.Biz
>>
>>
>>
>> "Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>>>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>>>
>>> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
>>> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
>>> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
>>> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have
>>> read recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a
>>> different partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather
>>> than enhance performance.
>>>
>>> I was interested to find this on the HP website
>>> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>>>
>>> Is this a good idea ?
>>> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want
>>> to start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS
>>> and Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system
>>> with a hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions
>>> are acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
>>> advantages.
>>>
>>> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order
>>> to be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary
>>> anyway and if so at what intervals?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Exactly Kerry

I just bought 4 500GB SATA drives for $180.00 Each.
(Because he didn't know how much space they will need.)
heck 300GB drives are under $100 now

So BEEF up the drives.

Russ

PS I just wish I knew why Memory Prices keep going up?


--
Russell Grover
SBITS.Biz
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
support @ SBITS.Biz
Remote SBS2003 Support
http://www.SBITS.Biz



"Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message
news:uW$WHufIHHA.4992@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> There are no set in stone rules for partitioning a server or how many
> drives and how to configure them. It all depends on how the server will be
> used, budget, and personal preference of the installer. That said I have
> two comments. 80 GB drives are ludicrously small in today's market. The
> price difference between an 80 GB drive and a 250 GB drive is spare
> change. Given that you will be using larger than 80 GB drives why worry
> about it. Allocate at least 40 GB to the system partition and forget about
> it. It is overkill but it will be one less thing to worry about for the
> next few years. It is absolutely silly to try and squeeze every last bit
> of space out of a small drive these days. Buy drives much larger than you
> think you need and spend your time worrying about things that matter like
> security, backups, uptime, etc..
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2
>
>
> "Arthur" <mynewsgroupaccount@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ObiV3$eIHHA.816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have been reading through this group's discussions around best practice
>>for partitioning a Small Business Server.
>>
>> When setting up an entry-level system using for example an HP ML110 with
>> 80Gb disk I have always used a 15Gb partinion for the OS and a second
>> partition using the rest of the disk to store the SQL database, Exchange
>> store and logs and users shared folders and other file shares. I have
>> read recently that it _could_ be a good idea to put the pagefile on a
>> different partition but it seems to me that this would degrade rather
>> than enhance performance.
>>
>> I was interested to find this on the HP website
>> http://www27.compaq.com/SB/ExchangeS...eConfigSolId=0
>>
>> Is this a good idea ?
>> I would be interested in hearing the views of the experts. I don't want
>> to start discussions about adding extra spindles and RAID types for OS
>> and Data/SQL/Exchange I just want to find out in an entry-level system
>> with a hardware RAID1 configuration whether two (or even one) partitions
>> are acceptable or whether the configuration recommended by HP gives any
>> advantages.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to keep Exchange/ SQL on seperate partitions in order
>> to be able to de-frag the other partitions? Should defrag be necessary
>> anyway and if so at what intervals?
>>
>