Exchange 2000 and PDC

[cwaalen]

Is it a bad idea to have a Exchange server 2000 as one of our PDC's in the same domain? If so, how do I undo this so I have no problems. Do I just demote the Exchange server and let the other PDC take over?

 

[Zelandakh]

?

2000 server doesn't use PDCs any more. If you are going to have one DC try not to have it on the same box as the Exchange 2000. Depends also on the expected load, number of users, spec of server...

 

[cwaalen]

I meant to say that I already have this server as one of the DC's in the Tree. We have app. 130 users on the AD tree and there is no other resources being used on this server besides Exchange. So I was wondering if its bad to have the Exchange server as one of the DC's. I know 2 DC's is probally over kill but its nice to have insurance.

 

[Zelandakh]

In that case I'd say dcpromo the Exchange box before installing exchange and it should run sweetly, but with that many users, try 1GB RAM minimum.

2DCs will make things run smoother and give some resilience in case you need to restart one of them.

 

[dmanlam]

At some point along the way, I read that hosting Exchange on a DC is not such a great idea -- don't know why, but we originally had ours set up like that and experienced constant problems (although, our Exch server was also severely misconfig'd). My thinking is that if your DC is simply handling 130 users' authentication/AD requests, how much could that overload the server? I'm assuming your server (DC) is pretty souped up...one thing Exch does do is hog memory. You don't want a DC brought to its knees because of some memory-hogging process from Exch.

If you have another DC anyway, then I'd say let it be. Make sure the PC's have tons of memory...people are probably going to be authenticated by whichever DC is faster to respond (so maybe that will end up being the non-Exch DC)...

-Drew

 

[cwaalen]

Both of the DC's have 1GB RAM and its seems like the Exchange server is the one everyone authenticates to first. But I haven't had any problems yet, KNOCK ON WOOD!!!!!!!

Thanks

 

[Hungster]

Keep one simple thing in mind, Exchange 2000 can not point itself to dc which is dns server
that's why you have exchange 2000 on another server so you can point dns to a dns server rather itself

 

[marcus1234]

Always have 2 at least 2 DC's in your domain. Will save a lot of time if you end up with a corrupt metabase on one DC. Maybe even best to have another DC but only to replicate every 4-5 days, so if someone removes an OU by mistake or something, you will have a few days before replication takes place. But make sure you put it in a site by it's self.

Also the resources you have is plenty. The Active Directory database won't be that large, and Exchange will have plenty of RAM for that number users.

 

[Zelandakh]

Hung, can you explain that again? I've got a DNS, Exchange, AD box and it works fine. OK, its as slow as an end user due to lack of RAM but that's the only issue.

I certainly wouldn't want to try that lot with a PDC emulator as well though.

 

[Hungster]

Here is what i was told from a instructor friend of mine and a programer tech friend who got a fully train exchange 2000 class, that running Exchange 2000, you need to have a main DC running DNS
then the exchange 2000 box would point to that DNS DC server, exchange 2000 can not point to itself for DNS resolution
it works fine on Exchange 5.5, in my lab, i am running that 5.5, going to try 2000 to find out how different on OWA part. Exchange 2000 must have AD running as well

i am running into little minor confusion on getting rid off the error warning on the event log on DNS part