Video Screencast Help

EV 9 site design query--Really need your suggestions

Created: 19 Nov 2010 • Updated: 19 Nov 2010 | 10 comments
This issue has been solved. See solution.


If i have a 2 physical sites, exchange servers in both sites

I have single EV site covering both the locations.

I have 2 SQl severs at each i can use both the SQL servers in each datacenter.

Now my question is regarding the SQL DB's.remeber I have a single EV site

can I keep SQL DB's(VS, FP,Audit,Monitoring) for Ev servers in each datacenres in their respective SQL servers.that is EV servers in data ceneter A will use SQL in DC A and SQL will contain the DB's only for EV servers in DC A and same applies to DC B.

OR by design if it is a single EV site,it is only possible that i can keep the above SQL databases in only SQL server and if this is the case should i go for 2 Ev sites ,since i cannot make use of both SQL servers at once..

Pls advice....

Comments 10 CommentsJump to latest comment

GertjanA's picture

BUT, check with Symantec first!

You will have only 1 directory database.

You will have only 1 Audit database.

You will have only 1 Monitoring database.

The above 3 need to be on 1 SQL server only.

For the Vaultstoredatabase and Fingerprint:

Create a Vaultstoregroup per location on the SQL server in that location.

Create a provisioning group, target your users per location.

This way you will have your Vault Store database and FP database in the same datacenter, but the 'common' ones need to be on 1 sql server only.

If latency is not too good between the Datacenters, you might be better off using 2 EVsites, having the database local to the DC's and exchangeservers.

Thank you, Gertjan, MCSE, MCITP,MCTS, SCS, STS

Maxie Braggs's picture

I must say you are the champ..valubale technical solutions fast enough when somebody really needs it..thank you so much..

GertjanA's picture

Thank you Maxie.

If you are satisfied with the answer, could you make it a solution?

Or wait for others to contribute.

Thank you, Gertjan, MCSE, MCITP,MCTS, SCS, STS

Maxie Braggs's picture

Sure..I will..I have a additional question though for you..

Ok..Now That I can keep VS and FP in the respective SQL servers in their own DC's.

Common SQL for Dir,Monitoring and Auditing, so considering my bandwidth is good that should be fine..My main worry was VS and FP.

I have considred Single innstancing storage at the datacenter level.that is i will create seperate vault store groups for each datacenter and enable SIS on SIS is limited to DC

What if i enable SIS at the site level..that means FP DB will be single again? or I can keep one for each DC despite i enable SIS at site level.

if i enable SIS at site levl does it mean WAN bandwidth will shoot up since EV has to check at both the locations before SIS is enabled for any single item..? pls advice

GertjanA's picture

Hello Maxie.

SIS is per Vault Store Group, Store or not.

The fingerprint database is created when creating a Vault Store Group.

I am not sure exactly how it works, but check

That has a good description in SIS etc.

I would go for 2 VSG's, 1 in each DC, to make sure the FP databases are in the same location.

Thank you, Gertjan, MCSE, MCITP,MCTS, SCS, STS

Maxie Braggs's picture

"I would go for 2 VSG's, 1 in each DC, to make sure the FP databases are in the same location."

considering the above statement, can i still enable SIS at the site level(or it is only possible at the VSG level?) to cover both the physical locations but keep the FP database local to each DC.

Best regards,


Maxie Braggs's picture

if SIS is enabled at the VSG level, then if i want to enable SIS to cover both the locations, then i need to create a single VSG and make the vault stores at both the locations part of it and enable sis for that VSG.this means I will end up with a single FP DB which will sit one DC SQL at any point?

WiTSend's picture

In order for the above decentralized design to have SIS at the site level you would have only 1 VSG and that would span across the datacenters.  It is unlikely that you have sufficient connectivity (bandwidth + latency) for this to be effective. 

The alternative design to achieve maximum storage savings would be to have a single EV centralized site, with only 1 VSG.  You would archive from a single location, one Exchange server would be local the other remote.  Archiving from the remote server would be across the WAN.  The vault stores would be in the centralized location.  This design would require that the remote Exchange users have OL in the cached mode and make use of vault cache.  We have had numerous clients with this type of design.  Again it would depend on the bandwidth to the remote location.

GertjanA's picture

Hi Maxie,

That is correct.

Edit after check:

If latency is good, you could very well do with one FP, and SIS across the DC's.

Check with a partner, they should know.

Thank you, Gertjan, MCSE, MCITP,MCTS, SCS, STS