Service pack 2 IIS5

[Nick]

I have installed service pack 2 and my iis has stopped working I had the same
problem with SP1 and I had to reinstall windows.Its like I get put behind a
firwall

[lefty]

weird... i just applied sp2 and the iis5 hotfix for the poizonbox hack via
terminal server, rebooted remotely and all came up smelling like roses...

this is on a machine running, dns, iis, isa server, ad, exhcange2000 and
sql2000!!!!

1gb ram and dual 500mhz procs and it purrs like a kitten...

r

"Nick" <dai...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:038e01c0e2dc$29ddd420$b1e62ecf@tkmsftngxa04...

[Jon Strawser]

Is it ok to run exchange on the same box as IIS? I am setting up another box
now - dual 800 P3's - 512MB RAM. It will probably host 50 sites, mostly
static pages with a few SSI / ASP, estimating probably 600,000 hits per day.
Would having exchange on same box degrade performance drastically?

Any comments?

Jon

"lefty" <mall...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:ukISHau4AHA.2076@tkmsftngp07...

[Mark Lamdanski]

I would not if I were you. Exchange is CPU intensive and hard drive
intensive. It would probably depend on how many users you will have in your
Exchange Server. Personally, I would not do it.

"Jon Strawser" <jo...@REMOVEbright.net> wrote in message
news:90zO6.157644$BB5.2...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...

[Jorgensen, Marty]

Jeeminy Christmas!!!! (my surprise is the number of hits expected...)

OK, here goes:

1. Yes, it's OK to run all that stuff on a single box. It will all run fine,
albeit slower than if each app were on it's own box. If you're running
hardware RAID 5 on a write-caching controller, you won't even have to worry
about disk partitioning.. (too much, other than aestethics, not for
performance reasons..)

2. You're running into the 'too many eggs in one basket' syndrome. If IIS
crashes, you run the risk of taking Exchange down with it, and vice versa.

3. If you're going to be taking 600K hits per day, then you're going to need
more firepower than this box. Yes, it'll handle it correctly, but a site(s)
that take that many hits per day are pretty darned important, I'll bet. The
'customers' using this site, whether internal staff or actual external
customers, will expect this box to be up 24x7x365. No site can do that,
unless you're doing some form of clustering (load balancing, etc..) since
you have to take it down sometimes for patches, service packs, etc...

4. And if you're going to expect five nines uptime (99.999% availablility),
you're gonna have more boxes anyways... so this conversation is a moot
point...

5. IF your management is stingy (like mine), just lay this out to them and
ask them what is an hour (or day..) of downtime going to cost them in terms
of revenue not coming in when this system is down. This is justification
for buying more equipment. It's like buying insurance, like having a
highly-paid systems people on staff. You hope that you never have to make
them work hard, cause if they're working hard, it's because something is
down and you're losing money. Just what insurance policies are for. This
tactic ALWAYS works. Put it in monetary terms cause it's the language they
understand...

Good luck!!!

"Jon Strawser" <jo...@REMOVEbright.net> wrote in message
news:90zO6.157644$BB5.2...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...

[Jon Strawser]

whoops! I meant 600k hits per month :)

I think a bit of hardware upgrading would be in order for that traffic on a
per/day basis!

Thanks for the tips!

Jon

"Jon Strawser" <jo...@REMOVEbright.net> wrote in message
news:90zO6.157644$BB5.2...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...