Bets server setup for 2 small offices

  ghance 17:30 10 Mar 10
Locked

Hi,

Need to upgrade our server(s). Would very much welcome your advice & views.

Current setup:
8 x staff (VERY mobile, frequent world travel)
2 x Offices (Brighton & Maidstone)
2 x Servers in Brighton (Compaq/Intel Pentium D 3GHz, 2Gb ram, 2x500GB HD)
1 x NAS in Maidstone

Brighton & Maidstone linked via a broadband VPN (Dreytek). Plus the Dreyteks take incoming VPN from laptops on the road.

Applications: each site running local file shares, plus Brighton runs SQL Express 2005 (Rental Management software called Easyjob 4.0)

Maidstone uses the SQL application (slowly) via Remote Desktop to an XP machine in Brighton. Obviously limited to 1 user at a time.

MS Office files are thankfully not heavily shared between the two sites, as each office tends to work on own projects. However there are a few files that get worked on my both locations from time to time.

On the desktops & laptops in each office / on the road, we map a drive to both local & the remote shared office files with offline folder switched on. Obviously accessing files at the remote site is slow.

Brighton Hardware:
2 x Servers in Brighton (Compaq/Intel Pentium D 3GHz, 2Gb ram, 2x500GB HD)

Server 1 (File share + exchange): SBS 2003
Server 2 (SQL Express + Remote Desktop + Archive files): XP SP3 + SQLExpress 2005 SP2

Maidstone Hardware: Server 3 (Linux NAS)

Thinking behind identical hardware at Brighton was the option for quick rebuild on 2nd box if 1st suffered serious hardware failure.

The SBS server keeps falling over & in need of rebuild, and needs bigger HD etc. So I'm tempted to replace Exchange with Google Apps premium and the file share + SQL servers with a single larger server:

PLAN A: - NEW HARDWARE

Proposed Server 4 (All-in-One):
AMD Phenom II QUAD core 3.2Gz, 8Gb ram, 4 x 1Tb HD (6Gb SATA), Gigabit NIC
Windows Server 2008 64-bit + SQLExpress + Terminal services
(Unsure if if need / want Hyper-V or not)

Proposed Server 5 (Archive + Install files / Technical docs library):
Linux NAS / Buffalo terastaion III (has file replication function)

OR PLAN B (B is for BUDGET): - REUSE HARDWARE, ADD MORE RAM & LARGER HD,

Proposed Server 1 (File Server):
Compaq/Intel Pentium D 3GHz, 4Gb ram, 2 x 1TB HD
Linux NAS

Proposed Server 2 (SQL + terminal services):
Compaq/Intel Pentium D 3GHz, 4Gb ram, 2 x 1TB HD
Windows Server 2008 64-bit + SQLExpress + Terminal services
(Again, unsure if if need / want Hyper-V or not)

Please help me make sense of my best options for upgrade:

1. One high spec box or keep split File Share & SQL functions on different boxes?

2. What are your experiences of running both SQL & File share on a single box?

3. Is Hyper-V or similar a good or bad thing in this enviroment?

4. Should I consider something else? like Server 2008 in both Brighton & Maidstone with DFS-R between them?

Thoughts please?

thanks

.gh


PS. Had a look through older posts, but couldn't find similar setup to ours.. although I suspect its really common setup.

  Technotiger 17:48 10 Mar 10

Afraid I can't offer any sensible advice, except to say that, surely this Question should be in the Business Forum, listed on the left of this page, where it is more likely to get the response(s)you require.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Huawei P10 review

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

An overview: What leading creative agencies are doing to improve diversity

New iPad, iPhone SE & Red iPhone 7 on sale now