Windows 2003 server dual network card setup
We have just upgraded to a Gigabit network at our office. The time to get files from the server improved, but not by that much. I read another solution using server cards in the server with connection teaming to get faster throughput. Is there a way to use 3 “standard” NICs to increase throughput or do I need to go with server NICs? We have the standard cards leftover from the switch to Gigabit. We somehow miss counted how many we needed.
Setup:
Server: Dell Poweredge 600SC running Windows Server 2003
Linksys EG1032 Gigabit NIC
Desktops: Most are running Windows 2000 Pro SP4
Some are running Windows XP
All desktops have Linksys EG1032 Gigabit NIC
Router: Linksys RV0041
Switch: Linksys SRW 2024
Thanks.
Setup:
Server: Dell Poweredge 600SC running Windows Server 2003
Linksys EG1032 Gigabit NIC
Desktops: Most are running Windows 2000 Pro SP4
Some are running Windows XP
All desktops have Linksys EG1032 Gigabit NIC
Router: Linksys RV0041
Switch: Linksys SRW 2024
Thanks.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Our server has PCI X slots. If all of the desktops are using the PCI NICs, would I see any improvement going with a card like the Intel PXLA8492MT in the server? Or would that not help because of the desktop limitations?
We are running 2 73GB, 10K Fujitsu HDs in a RAID array. We also have all of the CAD Drawings on a 300GB Maxtor HD on the PATA cable.
The server is used exclusively as a file server. I apologize but I don’t know how to search for bottlenecks so I don’t know where the slowdown is coming from.
I went to the performance monitor but I could not find disk statistics.
We are running 2 73GB, 10K Fujitsu HDs in a RAID array. We also have all of the CAD Drawings on a 300GB Maxtor HD on the PATA cable.
The server is used exclusively as a file server. I apologize but I don’t know how to search for bottlenecks so I don’t know where the slowdown is coming from.
I went to the performance monitor but I could not find disk statistics.
there i a option of bridging that will solve ur problem
rite click on ur lan & it will show u a option of bridge just use it and it will combine the speed
hope it will help u
bye
rite click on ur lan & it will show u a option of bridge just use it and it will combine the speed
hope it will help u
bye
Cam, give this a look:
System Monitor:
http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsServer/en/Library/9aa3769d-f7b0-4c7e-bafe-5d3e57f089a81033.mspx?mfr=true
What to look into (different types of bottlenecks):
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=146005
I hope that heps you using Performance Monitor and discovering what is (or are) the bottleneck.
Luck,
System Monitor:
http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsServer/en/Library/9aa3769d-f7b0-4c7e-bafe-5d3e57f089a81033.mspx?mfr=true
What to look into (different types of bottlenecks):
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=146005
I hope that heps you using Performance Monitor and discovering what is (or are) the bottleneck.
Luck,
An SRW2024 has quite a bit more backplane bandwidth then 2GB/s.
If I'm not mistaken, its actually 48Gbit.
I have SLM and SRW's here, running several 4X4X2 sata disk softraid file servers, I get about 47-57MB/s out of most of them over single, non aggregated links. And I'm thinking the limitation has more to do with the disk speed of my laptop then what the server can push.
If I'm not mistaken, its actually 48Gbit.
I have SLM and SRW's here, running several 4X4X2 sata disk softraid file servers, I get about 47-57MB/s out of most of them over single, non aggregated links. And I'm thinking the limitation has more to do with the disk speed of my laptop then what the server can push.
If not, then I suspect the original problem is still the problem....