Go Premium for a chance to win a PS4. Enter to Win

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 252
  • Last Modified:

SBS 2003 - add Server 2000 box as target device for backup

I've heard horror stories of additional servers in an SBS environment.

This is the plan:

SBS 2003 domain, single server serving 24 users (including Exchange).

Symantec Backup Exec System Recovery 8.5

Symantec, in their wisdom, have omitted to allow their Backup Exec software to detect and use external USB2 hard drives even when all drives are given the same name and drive letter.

Various 'fixes' include running scheduled batch files to stop services, redetect the USB drive, start services and then run the backup job.

Needless to say I remain unimpressed with that, and would prefer something with a little less potential to go that strange shape of pear...

My plan is to use a decommissioned Server 2000 box with two large drives Dynamic/mirrored or on a dedicated RAID controller as the destination to run daily backups overnight across the network from the SBS 2003 box.

The SBS 2003 and Server 2000 boxes both have gigabit NICs and will both sit on a gigabit switch.

The backup can be manually copied from the Server 2000 box or this can be automated with a batch file.

If this seems a little contradictory I would rather have a backup and risk losing it using a batch file to copy it than risk not getting a backup by using a batch file to initiate it...

So, that's it really.

The Sever 2000 box will to all intents and purposes be a NAS device of sorts. I am assuming that by leaving it as a standalone box in WORKGROUP I will be able to create and use one or more shares on it that can be accessed as the target directory for Symantec Backup Exec System Recovery 8.5 to write its daily backup job to.

Does that sound reasonable, or will SBS 2003 have a hissy fit at a Server 2000 box in any guise on the same network ?

I am happy enought o chance my arm and throw a FreeNAS oe OpenSUSE box in there for the same purpose, but I'm guessing this will cause at least as many potential issues.

All of this is to avoid buying a dedicated NAS device when I have quite a few very capable Server 2000 boxes lying around doing nothing.

Thanks in advance.
0
Copyleft
Asked:
Copyleft
1 Solution
 
MesthaCommented:
There are no issues with having additional servers on an SBS network. That story continues to be thrown about.

The ONLY restriction that causes SBS problems is if you try and move any of the FSMO roles to another server, SBS doesn't like that. You can have as many servers as you like on the network.

Simon.
0
 
CopyleftAuthor Commented:
Thanks for dispelling the urban myth :)
0

Featured Post

NEW Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows

Backup and recover physical and cloud-based servers and workstations, as well as endpoint devices that belong to remote users. Avoid downtime and data loss quickly and easily for Windows-based physical or public cloud-based workloads!

Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now