Need to add another Hub transport server to exch 2010

I have 2 servers now with all of the roles in a DAG environment and there are 3 large databases over 1.2TB  and because of this, it is causing a lot of back pressure. So I want to add another Hub server to help handle the work load. This way the 3 should work in round robin fashion but my question is, what is the best way for me to set this up?
LVL 1
vmichAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
There is nothing to it. Just install Exchange 2010 with the hub transport role. Exchange will start using it for that function immediately.

If you want it to send email to the internet then you will need to add it to the Send Connector, and if you want it to receive email from the internet then you will need to replicatate the configuration of your Receive connectors.

Just ensure that it is of the same version of Exchange as the other servers.

I would also suggest adding another database, you can have four (five if you have no public folders).

Simon.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
vmichAuthor Commented:
Simon,
Does this third hub need to be able to send and rec email?
What is happening is because of the 3 large dbs they have now, it causing all kinds of back pressure and that is why I want to add the 3rd hub to help with the work load..
0
aa-denverCommented:
If this is a single AD site deployment of Exchange, I would recommend all 3 servers have CAS, HT, and MBX roles installed.  This would result in the most utilization of all resources on each server, cpu, memory, NIC, and disk.   DAGs need "3 legs".  With only 2 servers you must have a file share witness.  With 3 servers, you have 3 legs without the file share.

Microsoft recommends installing all 3 roles on every server in most environments for best utilization of hardware and performance.  This is what they say about installing just one role on a server, per Microsoft:  "This means that deploying a single Exchange server role on a standard commodity server with multi-core processors might leave a large portion of available CPU underutilized."

"The multiple-role architecture becomes a building block-based architecture. With the multiple-role architecture, all servers in the Exchange environment (excluding Unified Messaging and Edge Transport) are exactly the same—the same hardware, the same configuration, and so forth. This uniformity simplifies ordering the hardware, as well as performing maintenance and management of the servers.  "

Refer to this article.  http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd298121(v=exchg.141).aspx#RTT
0
Determine the Perfect Price for Your IT Services

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden with our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Download your free eBook now!

aa-denverCommented:
There is one caveat to my recommendation to make all 3 servers have all 3 roles.  You say you are running DAGs.  The clustering requirement for a DAG prevents the CAS roles on the servers from being network load balanced with software NLB.  If you have a hardware load balancer this is not a concern, but if you use NLB for CAS that is something to be concerned about.
0
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
You tell me if it needs to send and receive email.
If it doesn't, then you aren't really gaining very much.

What is the specification of the existing servers? It may be more cost effective to increase the RAM of those than purchase additional licences and hardware.

Simon.
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
Well right now the 2 servers in the DAG have 4 cpus and 40GB of memory but we keep getting not enough resources errors and back pressure. So I though by adding in a third HUB server that it would help with the workload. The problem is coming from the 3 large dbs which are 1.3TB in size which the client is in the process of journaling the email to get it down and then the 3 large dbs will go away..
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
These are vms also..
0
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
Exchange can take up to 8tb databases and I know of sites with databases larger than that.
Is that three databases EACH of 1.3tb, or the total of 1.3tb?

It could be that the storage simply isn't up to it. It is certainly possible to run large databases, but you have to scale the server appropriately.

You may be better off standing up two new Hub/CAS in front of these two database servers then removing the roles completely. Depends if you have the licences or not.
Another option would be two more servers in a new DAG, again with all three roles, then spread the users out more. All four servers would be used for hub and CAS functionality.

Simon.
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
No each db is 1.3TB for a total of 3 plus other dbs which are 250GB in size. There is about 8 of those..
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
Plus they have no limits on the users so they are sending giant emails.. They will be changing this once then are done with the journaling and get rid of the 3- 1.3TB dbs
0
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
Are you on Enterprise edition of Exchange then?
If so, you can have 50 databases, so splitting the databases up immediately will have some impact. Sounds to me like the storage isn't up to it.
Have you implemented transport limits? If not I would do that before you finish journaling so that you aren't getting more large emails.

Simon.
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
No they have not implemented any thing yet and yes they are on enterprise
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
One more item, the exch servers are all on VMware esxi 5.1 and right now the 2 existing servers are on the same vmhost. Will it matter if I add this new HUB server to the same vmhost?
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
Never mind.. I put the new HUB on a different vmhost..
0
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
From a technical point of view it doesn't matter, but I fail to see the point if you are adding it to the same host. You may as well just increase the resources available to it, and you get no redundancy.

Simon.
0
vmichAuthor Commented:
added third hub server.
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Exchange

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.