Global Mail System

Associate
Joined
27 Dec 2006
Posts
53
Hey guys,

In work we've recently began discussing centralizing all our exchange mail servers to our head office - obvious benefits in control and cost. I thought it would be interesting to hear the opinions of outsiders on the subject of complete centralization of mail on a corporate level.

For a long time now I've been a supporter of the hub approach and up until recently I've been largely ignored on the subject - the planning required to centralize, the man hours, etc etc etc (glass half empty point of view essentially). It's taken some major exchange problems in our remote sites for some recognition of my point.

It's quite a scary thought, and one I've been trying to get across for some time, we have 15+ exchange servers dotted around with only our major sites having contingency in place for these servers - clustered. So that leaves about 8 servers that - god forbid - would be dead in the water if there was a major problem.

Up until recently there has been a constant ‘small business mentality’ in our IT management. We have 60+ offices, so clearly this approach doesn’t really fit.

Anyway, I’d be really interested to hear what you guys think. Have you experienced a similar situation? What were your main stumbling blocks? Have you worked in a completely centralized exchange network?
 
The Org I work for (1000 users 30+ sites) has Exchange centralised in our data centre.

Without knowing anything apart form what you've stated....

It really depends on how many seats you have in total to adequately size a server, how many seats in each branch office, the users perception of how email should 'perform', the grade of lines linking the branch offices to your central site, the amount of daily email traffic during peak hours plus whatever bandwidth other business (or none business) applications use these lines for.

We're a pretty standard setup, nothing fancy apart from our exchange HA solution and we never recieve complaints from users regarding percieved email performance issues. Our largest branch office by far has 200 seats.
One cap however doesn't fit all, it's definitely worth investigating the above to the best you can, network/application monitoring tools can help achieve this, if you have ones capable.

Emails a strange one to judge, it's possible for someone to send a message to 500 people with a 5mb attachement :-)
 
Currently we're running two clusters, one per primary datacenter, with load balanced between them day to day and obviously the capacity to run on one site only in a DR mode.

It's 2003, it's tied together with string (or Doubletake) but it works, our biggest problem with exchange is the huge hit in terms of IOPS we're taking from giving every man women and child we could find a blackberry. So there's a storage upgrade in the pipeline, which we may combine with new servers and a move to the latest and set up a 8 node geocluster between the sites.

My previous job we had much the same but we also had a presence in Asia and North America to support, high speed links were prohibitive in cost back then so we kept an exchange cluster in the US and servers as each Asia office.

Centralisation is good in some ways but it can be an issue when things go wrong, I wouldn't even think about centralising into an office, do it into a proper datacenter environment...
 
Interesting points guys, thanks. It's always good to get an insight into how others go about it.

It’s all still up in the air but your points have definitely helped me focus in on what’s important.
 
Good luck, I have to say that the Geocluster advances in 2008 are one of the few (maybe the only) things that make me want to upgrade. It makes it possible to run a resilient exchange platform across sites without third party software.

Really do watch your blackberry users though, typically they use three times the IOPS of someone using outlook on their desktop which really put storage performance calculations into a funk if you're not careful...
 
Really do watch your blackberry users though, typically they use three times the IOPS of someone using outlook on their desktop which really put storage performance calculations into a funk if you're not careful...

We've moved away from Blackberry over the past year. We have pushed for windows mobile. Only our US users are sticking with blackberry - seems more a trend in the states than anything else.
 
Back
Top Bottom