Welcome to Exchange Team Blog Sign in | Join | Help

Syndication

This Blog

Exchange 2010 Mailbox Server Role Requirements Calculator v6.3 Released

We updated the Exchange 2010 Mailbox Server Role Requirements Calculator.  Head on over to the Updates Tracking page to see what is changed and/or download the revised version.  The main article has also been updated.

- Ross Smith IV

Published Tuesday, March 16, 2010 5:04 PM by Exchange
Filed Under:

Comments

 

Nicolas Blank said:

What do I think ? I think Ross is VERY clever, and I'm very gateful for such a useful tool! Thank you Ross and everyone involved.
March 17, 2010 2:53 AM
 

Paul Hargreaves said:

"This workbook contains content that is not supported by Excel 2008 for Mac.
* Structured references
* Excel tables
* Table styles"

Is it worth someone engaging the MacBU to see how to best make it compatible across the board?
March 18, 2010 7:16 AM
 

John Sullivan said:

Hi Ross, I think this calculator is great thanks for putting so much time and effort into it.  A couple of quick questions, 1st is about the megacycles example calculation, is the G5 used as the base because it is an industry standard or should we be using the base value found in the SPEC site for the server we are looking at?  In the calculator it uses the DL 380 G5 x5470 3.33 GHz processor for a base of 18.75 but the processor in question is a  x5550 at 2.65 Ghz.  Should the DL380 always be used as the base value?

The second question I have is, when we work the megacycles numbers is the fact that a proc is hyper threaded already accounted for or can we safely boost our megacycle numbers by a factor of "X" i.e 1.5?  Thanks again.

John
March 18, 2010 3:01 PM
 

Ross Smith IV said:

Hey John, all of our megacycle / message profile calculations were done against the DL380 G5 platform I mentioned in the note, thus why you need to do the steps I outlined in the comment.

I'll need to get back to you on the second question.

Ross
March 18, 2010 3:26 PM
 

bday said:

I thought the Exchange team still suggested Hyper Threading be disabled as a best practice.
March 18, 2010 3:36 PM
 

Exchange said:

John, we cannot accurately predict the impact of hyper-threading across all hardware platforms. All of our guidance is based on running with hyperthreading disabled. We recommend that you do your initial sizing with hyper-threading disabled. If you choose to run with hyperthreading enabled then you should be doing your own validation testing to determine the impact.

Ross
March 22, 2010 1:53 PM
 

Bo Eschricht said:

Great tool! One question, though: The megacycles adjustment is defined to made using the formula Megacycles/core = ((New platform per core value) * (Hertz per core of New platform)) / (Baseline per core value). Shouldn't this be Megacycles/core = ((New platform per core value) * (Hertz per core of baseline platform)) / (Baseline per core value)? At least for me, it would make sense that the adjustment is made based on performance in relation to the baseline system.
March 25, 2010 8:06 AM
New Comments to this post are disabled

News

Exchange 2010 Trial download

This blog and its contents are provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and they confer no rights. Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified in the Terms of Use.


EHLO Idea
Would you like to suggest a topic for the Exchange team to blog about? Send suggestions to us.

Poll:

Other Exchange Blogs from MSFT