locked
Scaling up and Scaling down sharepoint servers RRS feed

  • Question

  • We are planning to develop sharepoint 2010 medium farm environment with 4 front ends(16GB Ram,300GB hard disk) 1 app server(16 GB,300GB RAM) 1 index server((16 GB,300GB RAM)) and 2 database clusters(3.5tb hard disk,64gb ram)

    any suggestions on whether this topology offers good scale out and scale up flexibility ,and also  even for the index server?

     

    Thanks

    Appreciate your help!

    Thursday, August 18, 2011 9:56 PM

Answers

  • Hard to tell as you don't give any numbers (users, hits/day, storage used, etc.), but I would drop one, perhaps 2 WFEs in favor of one, perhaps two additional App Servers.
    http://sharepoint.nauplius.net
    Friday, August 19, 2011 2:30 AM
  • I advice you to read about SharePoint Topologies

    http://prabathf.blogspot.com/2010/11/sharepoint-2010-farm-topologies.html

    and this

    http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/services/2010_medium_farm_performance_study_final.pdf


    Regards, Fadi Abdulwahab. http://sqlgoogler.blogspot.com/ Please click "Propose As Answer" if a post solves your problem or "Vote As Helpful" if a post has been useful to you
    Friday, August 19, 2011 11:17 AM
  • HP also offers a tool to estimate performance in different configurations. You might want to try it out: http://h71036.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/548230-0-0-0-121.html, it can give an indication, even if you're not going to use HP hardware.

    Which topology works best for your farm, mainly depends on the type and frequency of user actions, as well as the type and amount of stored data and documents.


    Morgan - http://blog.morg.nl
    Friday, August 19, 2011 11:40 AM
  • Yes.

    The Service Applications are redundant if you make sure that you install and start the services on multiple load balanced application servers. SharePoint 2010 handles the load balancing for you.

    Regarding the fail-over strategies you have to look into the different services and if they use a database for storage or not. The databases that the SA uses must be made redundant using normal strategies (clustering, mirroring or by configuring a fail-over server for the SA). You might get some data loss with SAs that do not use SQL for storage such as Excel services and Access services.

    When it comes to the actual service applications they normally work using timer jobs, these timer jobs are executed on the first available server and if it fails it will run on the next server serving that SA during next execution

    http://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/service-application-fail-over


    Regards, Fadi Abdulwahab. http://sqlgoogler.blogspot.com/ Please click "Propose As Answer" if a post solves your problem or "Vote As Helpful" if a post has been useful to you
    Friday, August 19, 2011 12:21 PM

All replies

  • Hard to tell as you don't give any numbers (users, hits/day, storage used, etc.), but I would drop one, perhaps 2 WFEs in favor of one, perhaps two additional App Servers.
    http://sharepoint.nauplius.net
    Friday, August 19, 2011 2:30 AM
  • I advice you to read about SharePoint Topologies

    http://prabathf.blogspot.com/2010/11/sharepoint-2010-farm-topologies.html

    and this

    http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/services/2010_medium_farm_performance_study_final.pdf


    Regards, Fadi Abdulwahab. http://sqlgoogler.blogspot.com/ Please click "Propose As Answer" if a post solves your problem or "Vote As Helpful" if a post has been useful to you
    Friday, August 19, 2011 11:17 AM
  • HP also offers a tool to estimate performance in different configurations. You might want to try it out: http://h71036.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/548230-0-0-0-121.html, it can give an indication, even if you're not going to use HP hardware.

    Which topology works best for your farm, mainly depends on the type and frequency of user actions, as well as the type and amount of stored data and documents.


    Morgan - http://blog.morg.nl
    Friday, August 19, 2011 11:40 AM
  • Hi,

    when u mentioned about having additional app servers, does it mean that it can have the same services as the first app server, so when the first app server fails,

    the 2nd app server can take over?

     

    thanks for the additional resources Trevor&Fadi

    Friday, August 19, 2011 12:15 PM
  • Yes.

    The Service Applications are redundant if you make sure that you install and start the services on multiple load balanced application servers. SharePoint 2010 handles the load balancing for you.

    Regarding the fail-over strategies you have to look into the different services and if they use a database for storage or not. The databases that the SA uses must be made redundant using normal strategies (clustering, mirroring or by configuring a fail-over server for the SA). You might get some data loss with SAs that do not use SQL for storage such as Excel services and Access services.

    When it comes to the actual service applications they normally work using timer jobs, these timer jobs are executed on the first available server and if it fails it will run on the next server serving that SA during next execution

    http://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/service-application-fail-over


    Regards, Fadi Abdulwahab. http://sqlgoogler.blogspot.com/ Please click "Propose As Answer" if a post solves your problem or "Vote As Helpful" if a post has been useful to you
    Friday, August 19, 2011 12:21 PM