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

SEPM + SQL Db Sizing Requirements - Confused!

Created: 28 Feb 2014 • Updated: 03 Mar 2014 | 9 comments
This issue has been solved. See solution.

Hello All,

My company is getting ready to implement SEPM Enterprise.  I was reading through the following docs and now I am even more confused about SEPM Server HD sizing requirements and external SQL Database sizing requirements.

The only FULL installation and admin guide I could find is for SEP 12.1.2 (We will be installing 12.1.4):

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=DOC6153

This states that the HD space requirements are:

"4 GB or more free space; plus 4 GB for the locally installed database."

The Release Notes Requirements for SEPM 12.1.4:

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH212063

"Enterprise version: 16 GB available minimum (100 GB recommended) for the management server; 40 GB available minimum (200 GB recommended) for the management server and a locally installed database.

Did something drastically change?  Why does SEPM 12.1.4 need so much more space.  Based on the "Sizing and Scalability Recommendations" doc for Endpoint protection: "Client update packages, patches, and content updates are also stored in the Symantec Endpoint Protection database and affect the storage requirements"

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=DOC4448

Which doc should I use for sizing requirements?  Was there a shift in how things are stored between the SEPM server and SQL Db?  Thanks in advance for your help.

-Mitesh

Operating Systems:

Comments 9 CommentsJump to latest comment

.Brian's picture

How many clients do you have? I can't speak for Symantec on what changed but it sounds like the documentation needs to be updated.

I can say I'm running some SEPMs with less than the min requirement stated above

This is the latest document I could find:

Symantec Endpoint Protection Sizing and Scalability Best Practices White Paper

Article:DOC4448  |  Created: 2011-07-14  |  Updated: 2014-02-13  |  Article URL http://www.symantec.com/docs/DOC4448

Please click the "Mark as solution" link at bottom left on the post that best answers your question. This will benefit admins looking for a solution to the same problem.

micdogg's picture

Thanks Brian,

We have roughly 2500 clients.  I saw that article that article you linked as well.  Looks like I'll just have to add the recommended sizes to the project request.

Don't mean to change the subject but would you know anything in regards to the SEPM LiveUpdate scheduling?  We are currently using McAfee ePO and we always wait a fews days to a week before downloading the new updates from McAfee.  

Does the LiveUpdate scheduling policy for SEPM allow the SEPM server grab new content every few days or a week?  All the documentation that I've looked at just states to change the schedule as needed but does not state what options are available for the scheduling.  Do you think it's advisable to install the LiveUpdate Administrator (LUA) server for this?

-Mitesh

.Brian's picture

You can set the schedule to run Continuously, Every x hours, daily, or weekly. Symantec puts out new defs usually 3x per day so I wouldn't wait that long to get the updates :)

here's a good read on the LUAs:

Best Practices for LiveUpdate Administrator (LUA) 2.x

Please click the "Mark as solution" link at bottom left on the post that best answers your question. This will benefit admins looking for a solution to the same problem.

micdogg's picture

Thanks,

Yeah, that's what we have set now, but I am definitely going to make the case to shorten the time period.

Is the scheduling you mentioned available on the SEPM Server under the policies or does that require a LUA server?  If we can get away with it, I would prefer not having to install the LUA because that will require another server.

Also, I was watching the "SymantecTV" video for installing a LUA server and one thing they mentioned was that Mac clients do not use the SEPM for LiveUpdate and that the LUA allows Mac clients to update from it instead of the external Symantec LiveUpdate server.

Sorry for bombarding you with questions.

Thanks,

Mitesh

.Brian's picture

Main reasons for using a LUA are outlined here:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH154896

Correct, Macs can only get updates from either the Internet or a LUA.

With 12.1.4, the SEPM can also be used as a reverse proxy for Macs to get their updates:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/HOWTO85034

Please click the "Mark as solution" link at bottom left on the post that best answers your question. This will benefit admins looking for a solution to the same problem.

micdogg's picture

Ok so I think I understand the uses of LUA but without it, doesn't the SEPM technically act as the respository for LiveUpdate content for all of the clients?

I know LUA can be used for bandwidth saving, failover, etc... but if we don't want the clients going outside to get content updates, doesn't the SEPM serve as the LiveUpdate content provider?  I want our clients updating themselves from the SEPM and not from an external Symantec server.

-Mitesh

.Brian's picture

Correct. You would than use the SEPM which contains the specified number of content revisions.

You can also use Group Update Providers (GUPs) to handle content for clients at remote sites:

Best Practices with Symantec Endpoint Protection Group Update Providers

Please click the "Mark as solution" link at bottom left on the post that best answers your question. This will benefit admins looking for a solution to the same problem.

SOLUTION
.Brian's picture

Happy to help :)

Please click the "Mark as solution" link at bottom left on the post that best answers your question. This will benefit admins looking for a solution to the same problem.