Video Screencast Help
Symantec to Separate Into Two Focused, Industry-Leading Technology Companies. Learn more.

Enterprise Vault on standalone Exchange Server

Created: 23 Jul 2013 • Updated: 02 Aug 2013 | 11 comments
This issue has been solved. See solution.

I am installing a new 2010 Exchange server, which will have all the roles on that one server... no separate HUB server. Is it acceptable to install Symantec Enterprise Vault for Exchange on this same server or does it need to be on a separate server?

With only 40 users in this company, I would hope it would work.

Operating Systems:

Comments 11 CommentsJump to latest comment

TonySterling's picture

It will need to be separate.  You can spin up a VM for the EV Server, but it does need to be on its own.  You could put SQL on the same EV Server if necessary.

SOLUTION
Nate.D's picture

I know it may not be the official symantec response, but I had a few thoughts:

You definetly wouldnt want to run it on anything like vmplayer or anything emulated inside of the OS. Is the Exchange server a physical box or is it a virtual machine? If you arent already heavily invested time-wise in the exchange server (and its a physical server) it might be better off to format the box, install ESX server as Tony mentioned (or Hyper-V) and then create a VM for the Exchange server that has the bulk of the boxes resources and then create a smaller VM for your EV server. VMware has a free version of the ESX server that you could test this with. 

Just speaking from experience; I have ran EV for exchange (and recently FSA at the same time, on the same VM) with about 1/8th the resources that are recommended by symantec, for over 1000 mailboxes, for almost 3 years now without issue...so I think you would be OK in a situation like that.

Vault is an incredible product, and I love it!.. but it seems that a lot of the documentation and information out there is for the massive enterprises, and maybe not as much thought put towards us 'little guys'. :)

If I was helpful in solving your issue please mark my post with a thumbs up or a solution!  Have a great day :)

SBelter's picture

Server is only in quotation phase right now and not even built, and yes it is a physical server. I have no experience in ESX, but can take a look. No idea what FSA is :)

Nate.D's picture

FSA is file system archiving, just another archiving product similar to EV for exchange. I was just trying to give an example of how little resources you could dedicate to it if you are concerned about exchange resources.

 

I would absolutely look into ESX, and get somewhat comfortable with it. Look for their free ESX standalone hypervisor, maybe test it out on a machine you have lying around and see how it goes. I think you will find it to be a great solution to your problem, *and* if you ever need another server spun up for some reason, you could just create a new VM for it and be up and running. My only disclaimer is I am not sure what the legalities of using the free version in a for-profit organization are, but you can look into it.

 

Hope this helps!

If I was helpful in solving your issue please mark my post with a thumbs up or a solution!  Have a great day :)

SOLUTION
ZeRoC00L's picture

For only 40 users, I don't think it will be efficient to implement EV for that amount.

If this response answers your concern, please mark it as a "solution"

GabeV's picture

Having Exchange and EV + SQL in the same server it would be good for testing purposes, not for production. I strongly recommend you having Exchange and EV on separate servers. Even though you have only a few users, these three products would be 'fighting' for the same resources. Here is the HW requirements for EV 9.0.4, so you can have an idea of what do you need:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/HOWTO32109

I hope this helps.

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

Patti Rodgers's picture

From a purely practical perspective I'd be against this. An outage to that box would take both online and archived mail with it. By keeping them on separate machines, an outage to one machine leaves the users with at least a little something to work with.   Looking at it from a user productivity perspective sometimes helps justify the costs associated with doing things the more expensive way. Neither EV nor Exchange are particularly prone to outages but we all know disasters happen (otherwise no one would need clustering or backups!).  Users losing access to both old and new mails would be a particularly painful outage, even in a small environment!

AndrewB's picture

just as a matter of interest, why did your company buy EV?

p.s. i agree with everyone else that you shouldn't install it on the same box with Exchange

Andy Becker | Authorized Symantec Consultant | Trace3 | Symantec National Partner | www.trace3.com

Nate.D's picture

I still see it as a very useful tool for archiving, compliance and eDiscovery regardless of the size of business, especially if they plan to grow. In talking with IT staff at other local businesses that have used email archiving, EV has gotten far and away the best review and reccomendations....if you're going to implement it, might as well use the best software for it!

If I was helpful in solving your issue please mark my post with a thumbs up or a solution!  Have a great day :)