Re: Switch Questions
- From: adykes@xxxxxxxxx (Al Dykes)
- Date: 22 Aug 2005 12:12:33 -0400
In article <1124726552.628160.58700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
<bpanders71@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I manage a small network (75 desktops, 4 servers) with a single HP
>Procurve 4000m switch which has one 1-port gigabit module and the other
>7 modules having ten 10/100 ports. I've got two HP Proliant DL servers
>with dual gigabit NICS. Obvioulsy, with only one gigabit port, I can
>only hook one of the NICS on one of the servers to it. What I'm
>thinking of doing is purchasing a separate smaller Linksys 16 port
>gigabit switch (under $400) so I can team the dual NICS on both of the
>proliant servers to get 2GB on each. FWIW, the two servers are a
>terminal server which hosts about 15-20 users (currently dual NIC'd at
>200 Mbps), and our main database/file/print server (only one NIC at
>1GBps) which sees some pretty heavy use. Both are win2k.
>
I think with the right 100MB cards in a server it can be bandwidth
aggregated to use two or three cards. Never done it, though.
I'd avoid an unmanaged switch in any production environment,
especially one with a non-trivial topology.
With "only" 75 desktops I'd be suprised if you are bandwidth-limited
on more than one server. Learn to use the management screens in your
4000m (a nice box) to see what your traffic is. When you find your
busy server use perfmon on it to see what it's bottlenecked on.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
.
- References:
- Switch Questions
- From: bpanders71
- Switch Questions
- Prev by Date: Switch Questions
- Next by Date: Re: Switch Questions
- Previous by thread: Switch Questions
- Next by thread: Re: Switch Questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
