Installing Terminal Services Application Mode
Ok I know this is not the optimal way but I only have one server to do this. Planning on setting up a server (Windows 2003) as a Domain Controller with Exchange and Terminal Services.
Question is through your experieince when was the best time to install Terminal Services in Application mode? Prior to Exchange, after exchange. Etc. Currently it is a DC and having a brain freeze on what to install next knowing that in the end it needs to be a terminal and exchange server.
Thoughts welcomed and appreciated.
Question is through your experieince when was the best time to install Terminal Services in Application mode? Prior to Exchange, after exchange. Etc. Currently it is a DC and having a brain freeze on what to install next knowing that in the end it needs to be a terminal and exchange server.
Thoughts welcomed and appreciated.
Yeah don't think it matters I have done it the other way exchange then TS and no issues, don't think they interfere with each other at all really.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
I would suggest that you consider deploying your Terminal Server as a VIRTUAL MACHINE. You are definitely going to run into problems if your TS users need Outlook, because you CAN'T install Outlook on the same machine with Exchange. However, if you use Virtual Server 2005 (it's free now, but you would need an additional Server 2003 license) then you actually have two separate machines running on the same hardware.
Main site for VS2005: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/default.mspx
Jeff
TechSoEasy
Main site for VS2005: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/default.mspx
Jeff
TechSoEasy
Jeff,
My experience of running TS on VMs has been pretty negative. TS requires lots of CPU and lots of memory. Should the server Servicad's referring to have more than one virtual core (i.e. CPU with hyperthreading or multiple CPUs) then installing TS inside a VM which only has one virtual CPU is going to result in an emormous performance hit. THe box will also require more memory than it would usually require as you have to keep two copies of Windows in memory. Yes, memory's cheap, but it's a consideration. Exchange also has a habit of grabbing as much memory as it can. You could end up with it fighting for memory with the VM process.
If one was to go down the VM path, I'd possibly suggest doing it the other way round: Have the main server as a DC running TS, and have Exchange running inside a VM. That way you can limit the CPU time and memory that the Exchange VM has access to through Virtual Server.
My experience of running TS on VMs has been pretty negative. TS requires lots of CPU and lots of memory. Should the server Servicad's referring to have more than one virtual core (i.e. CPU with hyperthreading or multiple CPUs) then installing TS inside a VM which only has one virtual CPU is going to result in an emormous performance hit. THe box will also require more memory than it would usually require as you have to keep two copies of Windows in memory. Yes, memory's cheap, but it's a consideration. Exchange also has a habit of grabbing as much memory as it can. You could end up with it fighting for memory with the VM process.
If one was to go down the VM path, I'd possibly suggest doing it the other way round: Have the main server as a DC running TS, and have Exchange running inside a VM. That way you can limit the CPU time and memory that the Exchange VM has access to through Virtual Server.
I have a client with a Production server running TS in a Virtual Machine. Granted they are small, but we are using Small Business Server 2003 as the host and Standard Server 2003 as the Guest running TS in Application mode for about 6 users. Additionally there are 7 other users on the network locally.
We have 3GB DDR2 PC4200 RAM and DUAL XEON 3.2Ghz processors. There are 2 160GB SATA drives in a RAID 1 which has the SBS OS and data in two partitions, and a 100GB third SATA drive that holds the virtual images. We looked at using SCSIs instead to improve performance but haven't found it to be necessary.
Your concern about Exchange taking up VS's RAM is unfounded. I do realize that Exchange likes to grab the leftovers, but RAM assigned to a Virtual Machine is removed from the Host's range of use, and cannot be trampled on by anything.
For a SMALL deployment of TS, this is a viable solution and the cost is significantly less than deploying a full server.
You're right that we don't know if this proposed single server can handle it... but it's still a viable suggestion if, by chance, it could do the job. One thing is for sure though... Outlook should not be installed on that server if Exchange is... and this is a way around that if the TS users need Outlook.
The fact is that it's possible to deploy Terminal Server in a Hosted environment as well... which may be an option. Or even using something like www.groove.net or www.officelive.com.
Jeff
TechSoEasy
We have 3GB DDR2 PC4200 RAM and DUAL XEON 3.2Ghz processors. There are 2 160GB SATA drives in a RAID 1 which has the SBS OS and data in two partitions, and a 100GB third SATA drive that holds the virtual images. We looked at using SCSIs instead to improve performance but haven't found it to be necessary.
Your concern about Exchange taking up VS's RAM is unfounded. I do realize that Exchange likes to grab the leftovers, but RAM assigned to a Virtual Machine is removed from the Host's range of use, and cannot be trampled on by anything.
For a SMALL deployment of TS, this is a viable solution and the cost is significantly less than deploying a full server.
You're right that we don't know if this proposed single server can handle it... but it's still a viable suggestion if, by chance, it could do the job. One thing is for sure though... Outlook should not be installed on that server if Exchange is... and this is a way around that if the TS users need Outlook.
The fact is that it's possible to deploy Terminal Server in a Hosted environment as well... which may be an option. Or even using something like www.groove.net or www.officelive.com.
Jeff
TechSoEasy
Tech just to add to this completely un microsoft, but it is possible to have a TS with Exchange and outlook running on it, as has happened to me in the past.
and all three working fine I might add. Although it is not recommended and normally I would not do it but in this case it was somebody else who installed outlook but exchange has ran fine ever since.
The other thing you could do is use OWA instead of exchange and run the two on the same box.
But I think to answer your question Sanx69 response is the way forward.
Michael
and all three working fine I might add. Although it is not recommended and normally I would not do it but in this case it was somebody else who installed outlook but exchange has ran fine ever since.
The other thing you could do is use OWA instead of exchange and run the two on the same box.
But I think to answer your question Sanx69 response is the way forward.
Michael
Michael,
In the past, with Exchange 2000 you COULD run Outlook as well. However http://support.microsoft.com/kb/266418 will state that you can't. Further info about that: http://blogs.msdn.com/mstehle/archive/2005/11/22/495941.aspx
It's not that it's just not recommended... what happens is that Outlook and Exchange use different MAPI's and eventually one will break the other... and it's never Exchange that wins.
Jeff
TechSoEasy
In the past, with Exchange 2000 you COULD run Outlook as well. However http://support.microsoft.com/kb/266418 will state that you can't. Further info about that: http://blogs.msdn.com/mstehle/archive/2005/11/22/495941.aspx
It's not that it's just not recommended... what happens is that Outlook and Exchange use different MAPI's and eventually one will break the other... and it's never Exchange that wins.
Jeff
TechSoEasy
In fact, Microsoft just released a paper TODAY which describes how to use Virtual Server on an SBS in a production environment:
http://sbsurl.com/vs
Jeff
TechSoEasy
http://sbsurl.com/vs
Jeff
TechSoEasy
doesnt really matter, i installed terminal services and then exchange later on, no problems at all...