[2 days left] What’s wrong with your cloud strategy? Learn why multicloud solutions matter with Nimble Storage.Register Now

x
?
Solved

Best method to go from 2000 to 2003 on a new server?

Posted on 2006-07-05
10
Medium Priority
?
279 Views
Last Modified: 2013-11-29
I have a server running 2000 Server and Exchange 2000.  The databases for Exchange are on an external RAID(this is all Dell hardware).

I have a new server and licenses for 2003 Server and Exchange 2003, though there's no OS in place yet.  I do not have a new external RAID, I'll need to move the old one over.

I do have Symantec BackupExec 10.

I would prefer to keep the same server name for the new server, because the clients are all configured to look to that server.

What is the best method for me to move to the new server?  If it's as easy as making a clean shutdown on the old server, moving the external array to the new server and attaching itt here, I'll be thrilled.  If it's not, however, what would be the best way?
0
Comment
Question by:bloodroot
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 5
  • 5
10 Comments
 
LVL 104

Expert Comment

by:Sembee
ID: 17046542
In theory you could forklift the server in to the new OS.
I wouldn't do it though.

Hanging on to the servername isn't really an issue. As long as both servers are available at the point the users login to Outlook for the first time, Outlook will automatically redirect to the new server.

The problem with retaining the same name is that you have to remove Exchange to get it to move.
Do you have anything with enough hard disk space to take the Exchange databases?
If so, then I would use my preferred migration method - swing.

Swing the data out to the temporary machine and remove Exchange from the original server.
Then move and build the new server. Once ready to go, swing the data to that server and remove the original server.

http://www.amset.info/exchange/migration.asp

Simon.
0
 

Author Comment

by:bloodroot
ID: 17046691
We don't have another server we can use for this purpose.

Examining the Exchange 2003 deployment guide has revealed that 2003 can mount 2000 information stores.

Given that we have to move the array anyway, would that be a reasonable way of doing it?  We're okay with downtime as long as it's less than one night...mail will spool on our Linux-based preprocessing server anyway.
0
 
LVL 104

Expert Comment

by:Sembee
ID: 17046908
Doesn't have to be another server. I have done it with workstations in the past.

What Microsoft says can be done, and what can be done in reality are usually two different things.
While you are moving the array right away, you cannot just remove Exchange like that. If you want to retain the same Exchange server name then you have to remove Exchange from the domain, then reinstall it. That will also mean reattaching the mailboxes - by hand.

You haven't said how many mailboxes you have, whether you will get it done in one night is a tough call. Due to the way that you want to move things around, it is one of those tasks that once you start you can't go back.

Simon.
0
Prepare for your VMware VCP6-DCV exam.

Josh Coen and Jason Langer have prepared the latest edition of VCP study guide. Both authors have been working in the IT field for more than a decade, and both hold VMware certifications. This 163-page guide covers all 10 of the exam blueprint sections.

 

Author Comment

by:bloodroot
ID: 17052461
If we were willing to accept the server name changing...  Is there any way we could leave the old server running, but without the priv1 database(and the array it was on) while bringing up the new server and attaching the old mailboxes?
0
 

Author Comment

by:bloodroot
ID: 17052486
Oh...and we have about 300 mailboxes taking up about 140GB worth of disk space.  In case it matters later.
0
 
LVL 104

Expert Comment

by:Sembee
ID: 17052980
If you take away the store without telling Exchange, then I would very surprised if Exchange started after the reboot. Remember that the store contains system information as well as the mailboxes.
You will be unable to drop the store gracefully so that you can move it because there are still mailboxes located in the store.

Simon.
0
 

Author Comment

by:bloodroot
ID: 17053038
So you would still advocate the swing method.  Do you know what would happen if we had SERVERA, swung to SERVERB and then decommissioned SERVERA and brought a new SERVERA online in the course of, say, one night?

Would our users be able to log in the next morning?
0
 
LVL 104

Accepted Solution

by:
Sembee earned 2000 total points
ID: 17053094
I have done it that way before. An against the clock migration is possible.
Outlook would work because it would go looking for the server with the name servera.domain.com - which would resolve and have Exchange on it.

There are two issues.

1. Speed of the moves. Shifting the store around will take a while. If possible, you would try and move as many mailboxes early.

2. The major problem you will have is getting the data off Exchange 2000. You have to replicate the public and system folders and that is slow with Exchange 2000 (and cannot be sped up).

If I was going to do a swing based on the information you have stated above, I would build the temporary server as Exchange 2003 SP2 at least 10 days before the switch - the longer the better. Configure the replication of the public and system folders and then leave the servers alone. It will not impact the users, and you have a good chance of getting the replicated data on to Exchange 2003 in time for the switch over.
Once you have the data on Exchange 2003, you can use the new tools to force the data to go across immediately, rather than waiting for replication to take place. Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2003 migrations are much quicker than coming off Exchange 2000.

Simon.
0
 

Author Comment

by:bloodroot
ID: 17053744
We've just realized something.  It should be possible to have two seperate disk arrays inside our enclosure, hooked to two seperate servers.  That would let us effectively have one array for each server.

That should simplify things greatly, right?

Thank you for your help.
0
 
LVL 104

Expert Comment

by:Sembee
ID: 17053763
If you can have two arrays, then everything becomes much simpler - all the issues go away because you can have both servers running at the same time.

Simon.
0

Featured Post

Tech or Treat!

Submit an article about your scariest tech experience—and the solution—and you’ll be automatically entered to win one of 4 fantastic tech gadgets.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

On September 18, Experts Exchange launched the first installment of the Help Bell, a new feature for Premium Members, Team Accounts, and Qualified Experts. The Help Bell will serve as an additional tool to help teams increase question visibility.
If something goes wrong with Exchange, your IT resources are in trouble.All Exchange server migration processes are not designed to be identical and though migrating email from on-premises Exchange mailbox to Cloud’s Office 365 is relatively simple…
In this video we show how to create a Resource Mailbox in Exchange 2013. We show this process by using the Exchange Admin Center. Log into Exchange Admin Center.: Navigate to the Recipients >> Resources tab.: "Recipients" is our default selection …
There are cases when e.g. an IT administrator wants to have full access and view into selected mailboxes on Exchange server, directly from his own email account in Outlook or Outlook Web Access. This proves useful when for example administrator want…

656 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question