I'm sorry to hear that David Killingsworth has been laid off. It was so refreshing to read someone cut through the hype and document the challenges of a Notes to Exchange migration:
-When migrating to Microsoft, keep an eye on the cost of additional hardware, the cost of SQL server licenses, and the cost of bandwidth upgrades which will be inevitable and make sure and factor in those extra costs. You won't have a server for server comparison between your existing products and Microsoft. You may be able to use virtual machines for some of your systems, but some of the systems require physical hardware and/or cannot exist on the same box as other servers.Those second and third bullets are Microsoft myths I have attacked for years, so it's refreshing to be validated. The bit about the mailboxes being split amongst different Exchange Stores is something I attacked when Exchange 2000 first hit the streets -- sure, you can have multiple stores, but Microsoft gives you no tools to figure out how to assign users to particular stores and having to do so in the first place is a silly arbitrary overhead thing for Exchange admins. And apparently for no real benefit in terms of disk or storage management.
- Single Copy Storage that Microsoft has touted for Exchange is a myth (for lack of a better word) and Microsoft Engineering is actually recommending against factoring it in as a disk saving attribute when doing capacity planning. Single Copy Storage is only valid across each Exchange Store (database) on an Exchange server, and typically, you will have several Exchange Stores on each server -- so the benefit is minimal.
- Only a certain number of mailboxes can exist on an exchange server and those mailboxes must be split amongst different Exchange Stores (databases). There is recommended limit to how many stores you put on each Exchange server. It's actually quite a bit more complicated than the Domino database model and Domino's DAOS (which is server wide).
- I can't stress enough how much more bandwidth you will need compared to a Domino infrastructure.
You should go back in his archives a few postings and see how many Exchange servers were used to replace Domino servers. Let's put it this way -- there was definitely no consolidation story here.
Link: David Killingsworth: Migrating to Exchange - One Domino Admin's tell all journey ends >
Post a Comment
- 2
Rishi | 5/14/2009 9:39:21 PM
Ed,
Visit this site.Lotus Notes 8.5 is #1 e-mail software downloads.
{ Link }
# 1. Lotus Notes # 213 downloads
# 2. Mozilla Thunderbird # 106 downloads
# 3. A to G # 63 downloads
# 4. Microsoft Outlook Express # 49 downloads
# 5. Eudora # 32 downloads
- 3
Peter Wilson | 5/14/2009 11:49:45 PM
I think thats the stats for the last week only. Notes has 2123 downloads vs. 63,669 for Thunderbird ?
Pete
- 4
Darren http://www.dadams.co.uk | 5/15/2009 1:35:19 AM
@2 - that link goes to Mac downloads, see breadcrumbs at the top. Anyway, I'm not sure that site provides the best comparison... most Notes users will get their client as part of a (robust and scalable) enterprise deployment, not from a download site.
I agree with Peter @1 - I've always viewed Exchange as something that businesses have to put up with in order to get Outlook on desktops, and I've never read any account to tell me otherwise. If anyone wants to point out something that contradicts my theory I'll willingly read it.
- 5
Jfranchetti | 5/15/2009 8:19:33 AM
Well, if they did layoffs on their email team, seems they were able to consolidate something...
Though really points to odd timing to spend considerable dollars on a mail to mail conversion.
- 6
Jim Casale http://www.jimcasale.net | 5/15/2009 9:03:36 AM
@5 "Though really points to odd timing to spend considerable dollars on a mail to mail conversion."
You would think right? Never underestimate the the questionable decisions and actions of some organizations
- 7
Charles Robinson http://www.cubert.net | 5/15/2009 9:18:55 AM
I know you didn't write the blog post you're referencing so I'm not really taking you task here. I want to point out a couple of inaccuracies.
SQL Server is not required to run any version of Exchange. In David's scenario it is used for Office Communication Server and chat archiving, which while it is part of their collaboration infrastructure, it is not part of Exchange.
There is no hard limit to the number of mailboxes an Exchange 2007 server can handle. The recommendation is 1000 average users per processor core, assuming adequate memory and storage: { Link } . There are hard limits to storage groups and databases: up 50 storage groups per server or 50 databases. Each database can be up to 16TB.
Regarding your own comments, I don't understand what your gripe is here: "... Microsoft gives you no tools to figure out how to assign users to particular stores ..." I have segmented Domino users on multiple servers before, and Domino doesn't give me a utility to suggest the best server to put mail users on, either. What are you expecting a tool to do for you?
- 8
Alan Lepofsky http://www.alanlepofsky.net | 5/15/2009 1:51:24 PM
Charles wrt "Domino doesn't give me a utility to suggest the best server to put mail users on" isn't that EXACTLY what the Tivoli Analyzer tool for Domino does? I demoed it years ago at Lotusphere, and if I recall, that tool was rolled into the core Domino Admin features. Its been a long time since I managed a server, I could be wrong.
- 9
Norm | 5/15/2009 2:11:13 PM
@8 - I tend to agree w/Alan - I've used Tivoli Analyzer for Domino and it does just that (and more).
- 10
Charles Robinson http://www.cubert.net | 5/15/2009 2:29:11 PM
@8 - I've never heard of that tool and I managed Domino servers from 1999 - 2007. :-) I'll have to take a look at it.
- 11
Ken Yee http://www.keysolutions.com/blogs/kenyee.nsf | 5/15/2009 3:27:59 PM
Youch...wonder if it was retribution by his management for David blogging about the experience...a 7X increase in the #servers to support the same #users is ridiculous. It's too bad the company's shareholders didn't see this info...they'd be asking for the company's management heads on a stick...
- 12
Peter Wilson | 5/19/2009 6:17:30 AM
@11 His management probably just wanted Outlook at any cost. Seems to be what I'm hearing more and more at the moment - sigh
- 13
Indian Notes Admin | 5/28/2009 12:44:20 AM
Domino is the only messaging System offering flexibility to work on multiple platforms unlike Exchange which only sits on Windows hence Domino is less prone to Virus attacks or other security flaws which are part of Windows OS patching by System admins. As mentioned by others in forums, Windows needs multiple hardware required by ADS for its FSMO roles, Now Exchange 2007 too needs more hardware to work with adding more costs,admins, IT management etc. and other overheads as per environment. My personal experience after working with Exchange for 5 -6 years and then switching over to Domino, almost a real pleasant experience with a good nights sleep.
Great info.. but we all know Domino is a great email backend. Most organisations IT guys (even the Exchange guys) will say that... however it's ALLLLL about the client. People just want email and want it looking great and easy to use. Everything else such as databases, integrated IM is just value add.
Lotus - continue to focus focus focus on the client with Notes 9,10,11... making it as lean, friendly to use as all other clients such as Outlook, Mac, Thunderbird. Continue to focus on a great web email experience, so organisations will see the value in staying with Notes rather than consider alternatives.
Pete