|
|
Hello,
We are starting to see some problems with our current implementation of
WSUS. Server is paging like crazy, sql process was eating up RAM (I've since
limited it to 768M), etc...
Does anyone have any deployment recommendations for a system that needs to
support around 4000 client workstations taking into consideration the
following limitations?
* We do not have existing SQL CAL's/licenses so we need to run on one of the
free versions of SQL.
* We do not have Server 2003 CAL's, so we need to run on 2003 Web Edition,
which is limited to 2G of RAM.
* Supported computers are all on high speed connections... campus environment.
Currently our system specs:
WSUS 2.0 SP1
SQL Server 2005 Express
Windows Server 2003 Web Edition 2G RAM
Currently SUSDB is +2G in size
~4000 clients
Considering our limitations, is one system ever going to be enought to
support this number of users for Windows/Office updates?
Thanks in advance for any help..
|
|
"Dasani" <Dasani[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D31661A4-2FF5-4DDB-B94E-C460180CF8E2[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > We are starting to see some problems with our current implementation of
> WSUS. Server is paging like crazy, sql process was eating up RAM (I've
> since
> limited it to 768M), etc...
>
> Does anyone have any deployment recommendations for a system that needs to
> support around 4000 client workstations taking into consideration the
> following limitations?
>
> * We do not have existing SQL CAL's/licenses so we need to run on one of
> the
> free versions of SQL.
>
> * We do not have Server 2003 CAL's, so we need to run on 2003 Web Edition,
> which is limited to 2G of RAM.
>
> * Supported computers are all on high speed connections... campus
> environment.
This is a simple answer, Dasani. There's no functional environment that's
going to be able to support 4,000 WSUS clients on a single server using a
"free" version of SQL Server, or Windows Server 2003 Web Edition.
You're going to have to go one of two ways:
[a] Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition, so you can use the SQL Server
2005 Embedded Edition that ships with WSUS v3.
[b] Multiple Web Edition WSUS servers, each supporting perhaps no more
than 500-1000 users on SQL Server Express Edition.
I'm still checking to see whether the Embedded Edition will install on Web
Edition, but given that WMSDE would not, I'm skeptical that the Embedded
Edition will either.
> Currently our system specs:
>
> WSUS 2.0 SP1
> SQL Server 2005 Express
> Windows Server 2003 Web Edition 2G RAM
> Currently SUSDB is +2G in size
> ~4000 clients
A third option might be to put the SQL Server Express Edition on a =backend=
server, which will give you a bit more horsepower to support the clients,
but I still think you'll hit a ceiling trying to support 4000 clients on
Express Edition of any type deployment.
> Considering our limitations, is one system ever going to be enought to
> support this number of users for Windows/Office updates?
Methinks not.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
"Lawrence Garvin (MVP)" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > This is a simple answer, Dasani. There's no functional environment that's > going to be able to support 4,000 WSUS clients on a single server using a > "free" version of SQL Server, or Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. > > You're going to have to go one of two ways: > [a] Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition, so you can use the SQL Server > 2005 Embedded Edition that ships with WSUS v3. > [b] Multiple Web Edition WSUS servers, each supporting perhaps no more > than 500-1000 users on SQL Server Express Edition. > > I'm still checking to see whether the Embedded Edition will install on Web > Edition, but given that WMSDE would not, I'm skeptical that the Embedded > Edition will either. > > > Currently our system specs: > > > > WSUS 2.0 SP1 > > SQL Server 2005 Express > > Windows Server 2003 Web Edition 2G RAM > > Currently SUSDB is +2G in size > > ~4000 clients > > A third option might be to put the SQL Server Express Edition on a =backend= > server, which will give you a bit more horsepower to support the clients, > but I still think you'll hit a ceiling trying to support 4000 clients on > Express Edition of any type deployment. > > > Considering our limitations, is one system ever going to be enought to > > support this number of users for Windows/Office updates? > > Methinks not. > > -- > Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP > Independent WSUS Evangelist > MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007) > https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E> > Everything you need for WSUS is at > http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx> > And, almost everything else is at > http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com> .....
Thanks for the info Lawrence.
The primary reason we went with WebEdition is that we were told (by our
Microsoft Partner) that we could not run WSUS on Standard Edition unless
Windows CAL's were purchased for each client that we connected/served. Since
our environment is primarily Novell, we do not have much invested in Windows
CALs. In fact we used to run SUS on Standard Edition but changed to
WebEdition when we moved to WSUS for this very reason.
Is this info correct? I've been operating under the belief that if I use
Standard Edition I must purchase a Windows Server CAL for each WSUS client
served. And, if I run SQL Server 2000, I must either purchase a processor
license or CAL's for each WSUS client.
Dasani
|
|
"Dasani" <Dasani[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:791CD26C-810A-4202-B249-1F43CE9213B1[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > The primary reason we went with WebEdition is that we were told (by our
> Microsoft Partner) that we could not run WSUS on Standard Edition unless
> Windows CAL's were purchased for each client that we connected/served.
> Is this info correct?
This is accurate information.
> I've been operating under the belief that if I use
> Standard Edition I must purchase a Windows Server CAL for each WSUS client
> served. And, if I run SQL Server 2000, I must either purchase a processor
> license or CAL's for each WSUS client.
This is correct.
The challenge with Web Edition, while overcoming the need to buy CALs, is
that there's a de facto performance limitation using Web Edition, which is
primary constrained by the performance limitations of the database server
you're forced to use on a Web Edition server.
Thus my two options presented:
> You're going to have to go one of two ways:
> [a] Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition, so you can use the SQL
> Server
> 2005 Embedded Edition that ships with WSUS v3.
> [b] Multiple Web Edition WSUS servers, each supporting perhaps no more
> than 500-1000 users on SQL Server Express Edition.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/technologies/featured/wsus/default.mspx
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
This is an interesting recommendation. I have a couple of WSUS 2.0
servers running on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition serving over 4000
clients and are still updating clients. Its on a dual cpu (2.4Ghz)
machine with 2GB of RAM (which is the maximum that a Web Edition will
use). One of them is running on VMWARE. I'm not sure if it makes a
difference that they are replica servers but they are running just
fine.
As for the CAL licenses, I think it is clearly written in the
Microsoft's FAQ that the Web Edition doesn't need CALs.
An interesting twist here for me, is if I use a Windows 2003 Standard
Edition for the upstream master server so I can use the WSUS 3.0
feature of roll-up reports...how many CALs would I need. Is it the
number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
|
|
"VocalEyes" <cdeguia[ at ]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1183577836.434821.58440[ at ]j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[Quoted Text] > This is an interesting recommendation. I have a couple of WSUS 2.0
> servers running on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition serving over 4000
> clients and are still updating clients. Its on a dual cpu (2.4Ghz)
> machine with 2GB of RAM (which is the maximum that a Web Edition will
> use).
Thank you for the empirical information concerning deployment of WSUS2 on
Web Edition.
I do believe you're the first person to report successfully using Web
Edition in a large environment.
> One of them is running on VMWARE. I'm not sure if it makes a
> difference that they are replica servers but they are running just
> fine.
Not for purposes of this discussion.
> As for the CAL licenses, I think it is clearly written in the
> Microsoft's FAQ that the Web Edition doesn't need CALs.
Correct. However, there are a couple of complicating factors that generally
make Web Edition economically infeasible for most deployments.
[a] Web Edition can only support installation of MSDE2000. Which
functionally limits a single-server Web Edition WSUS2 deployment to about
500 clients per server.
[b] I've not yet been able to get a definitive answer, nor have I been able
to test, whether or not SQL 2005 Express, or the Windows Internal Database,
will install on Web Edition; however, given that WMSDE will not, I'm
skeptical that any edition of SQL 2005 would do so. I do plan to test these
scenarios fairly soon, however.
[c] Thus, Web Edition generally requires a back-end database server. For
most organizations, the rationalizations for using Web Edition are usually
*not* consistent with the deployment of a back-end SQL Server (including
appropriate SQL Server licensing, not to mention the SQL CALs required).
In *most* circumstances, licensing a Standard Edition server and using WMSDE
(which would support about 1500-2000 clients), was much less expensive than
the alternative dual-server Web Edition scenario.
> An interesting twist here for me, is if I use a Windows 2003 Standard
> Edition for the upstream master server so I can use the WSUS 3.0
> feature of roll-up reports...how many CALs would I need.
You need one CAL for every *machine* which obtains updates from any WSUS
Server -- unless those machines already have a Windows CAL. In which case,
they're already licensed. I'm guessing, though, that this is not the case.
Which, then, also begs the question: If you've got 4000 clients updating
from a Web Edition server (to avoid Windows CAL requirements) -- where's the
database server -- and do those 4000 clients have =SQL= CALs?
> Is it the
> number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
> need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
It's based on the number of =clients=.
Here's a philosophical question for you: Do the *replica* servers require
CALs if they get their updates from someplace (as is recommended in the
documentation) other than themselves? I do not know the answer to that
question -- but now you've got me pondering the answer! ;-)
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
On Jul 5, 10:47 pm, "Lawrence Garvin \(MVP\)"
<onsit...[ at ]community.nospam> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > "VocalEyes" <cdeg...[ at ]gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1183577836.434821.58440[ at ]j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > This is an interesting recommendation. I have a couple of WSUS 2.0
> > servers running on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition serving over 4000
> > clients and are still updating clients. Its on a dual cpu (2.4Ghz)
> > machine with 2GB of RAM (which is the maximum that a Web Edition will
> > use).
>
> Thank you for the empirical information concerning deployment of WSUS2 on
> Web Edition.
>
> I do believe you're the first person to report successfully using Web
> Edition in a large environment.
>
Well, I just inherited this WSUS infrastructure and tasked to upgrade
and maintain it.
I am actually surprised that its still working.
> > One of them is running on VMWARE. I'm not sure if it makes a
> > difference that they are replica servers but they are running just
> > fine.
>
> Not for purposes of this discussion.
>
> > As for the CAL licenses, I think it is clearly written in the
> > Microsoft's FAQ that the Web Edition doesn't need CALs.
>
> Correct. However, there are a couple of complicating factors that generally
> make Web Edition economically infeasible for most deployments.
>
> [a] Web Edition can only support installation of MSDE2000. Which
> functionally limits a single-server Web Edition WSUS2 deployment to about
> 500 clients per server.
>
> [b] I've not yet been able to get a definitive answer, nor have I been able
> to test, whether or not SQL 2005 Express, or the Windows Internal Database,
> will install on Web Edition; however, given that WMSDE will not, I'm
> skeptical that any edition of SQL 2005 would do so. I do plan to test these
> scenarios fairly soon, however.
>
I have installed WSUS 3.0 on a Web Edition and the services applet
says I have
a Windows Internal Database (MICROSOFT##SSEE).
> [c] Thus, Web Edition generally requires a back-end database server. For
> most organizations, the rationalizations for using Web Edition are usually
> *not* consistent with the deployment of a back-end SQL Server (including
> appropriate SQL Server licensing, not to mention the SQL CALs required).
>
> In *most* circumstances, licensing a Standard Edition server and using WMSDE
> (which would support about 1500-2000 clients), was much less expensive than
> the alternative dual-server Web Edition scenario.
>
The main reason we went with the Web Edition is because...we are not
on a
Windows networking environment, thus no CALs (fyi...no Active
Directory either). It would probably cost us
millions of dollars just to purchase CALs for WSUS servers with
Windows Server 2003 SE.
Same thing with SQL CALs. So for our case, its more expensive to go
with SE for all WSUS servers.
> > An interesting twist here for me, is if I use a Windows 2003 Standard
> > Edition for the upstream master server so I can use the WSUS 3.0
> > feature of roll-up reports...how many CALs would I need.
>
> You need one CAL for every *machine* which obtains updates from any WSUS
> Server -- unless those machines already have a Windows CAL. In which case,
> they're already licensed. I'm guessing, though, that this is not the case.
>
That is correct, since all Windows clients obtain their updates from a
Web Edition WSUS server.
> Which, then, also begs the question: If you've got 4000 clients updating
> from a Web Edition server (to avoid Windows CAL requirements) -- where's the
> database server -- and do those 4000 clients have =SQL= CALs?
>
It is on the same WSUS server using (currently) MSDE. No SQL, no CALs.
> > Is it the
> > number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
> > need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
>
> It's based on the number of =clients=.
>
The client here for the master server running SE are the replica WSUS
servers, so I guess its 10 CALS?
> Here's a philosophical question for you: Do the *replica* servers require
> CALs if they get their updates from someplace (as is recommended in the
> documentation) other than themselves? I do not know the answer to that
> question -- but now you've got me pondering the answer! ;-)
>
Good question. I believe if a replica server is getting their updates
from Web edition WSUS server or directly from Microsoft, then it
should not need any CALs.
> --
> Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
> Independent WSUS Evangelist
> MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D09...
>
> Everything you need for WSUS is athttp://www.microsoft.com/wsus
>
> And, almost everything else is athttp://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
> ....
|
|
VocalEyes wrote:
[Quoted Text] >>> Is it the
>>> number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
>>> need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
>> It's based on the number of =clients=.
> The client here for the master server running SE are the replica WSUS
> servers, so I guess its 10 CALS?
No, one for each WSUS client reporting to any of the replica servers.
Microsoft's licensing is fairly clear; any device or user that makes use,
directly or indirectly, of a Windows server (except for Web Edition) requires a CAL.
... I suppose if you run in per-server mode, technically you only need one CAL
for every concurrent connection, which is a much smaller number ... except that
there isn't any obvious way to measure or control the number of concurrent
connections. (?)
Harry.
|
|
"VocalEyes" <cdeguia[ at ]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1183733746.288501.113910[ at ]d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
[Quoted Text] >> [b] I've not yet been able to get a definitive answer, nor have I been
>> able
>> to test, whether or not SQL 2005 Express, or the Windows Internal
>> Database,
>> will install on Web Edition; however, given that WMSDE will not, I'm
>> skeptical that any edition of SQL 2005 would do so. I do plan to test
>> these
>> scenarios fairly soon, however.
> I have installed WSUS 3.0 on a Web Edition and the services applet
> says I have a Windows Internal Database (MICROSOFT##SSEE).
Interesting!
That opens up a whole new realm of deployment scenarios for
non-WindowsServer shops, not previously available.
> The main reason we went with the Web Edition is because...we are not
> on a Windows networking environment, thus no CALs (fyi...no Active
> Directory either).
I assumed that. It's the primary reason any organization would install Web
Edition. However, with WSUS 2.0, there was no way to avoid the CALs in an
organization > 500 systems, because MSDE2000 was the *only* viable database
installation with WSUS 2.0 that did not require additional CALs to be
purchased.
> Same thing with SQL CALs. So for our case, its more expensive to go
> with SE for all WSUS servers.
True. However, your =WSUS2= servers are not using the Windows Internal
Database, which means they're getting database services from somewhere --
and probably unlicensed at that -- unless, somehow, you've managed to make
each of these 2,000 client WSUS2 servers functional using only MSDE2000.
Luckily, it looks like you have an upgrade path which will resolve both of
those issues. (The underpowered database engine and/or the possible
licensing omission.)
>> > An interesting twist here for me, is if I use a Windows 2003 Standard
>> > Edition for the upstream master server so I can use the WSUS 3.0
>> > feature of roll-up reports...how many CALs would I need.
>>
>> You need one CAL for every *machine* which obtains updates from any WSUS
>> Server -- unless those machines already have a Windows CAL. In which
>> case,
>> they're already licensed. I'm guessing, though, that this is not the
>> case.
> That is correct, since all Windows clients obtain their updates from a
> Web Edition WSUS server.
>> Which, then, also begs the question: If you've got 4000 clients updating
>> from a Web Edition server (to avoid Windows CAL requirements) -- where's
>> the
>> database server -- and do those 4000 clients have =SQL= CALs?
> It is on the same WSUS server using (currently) MSDE. No SQL, no CALs.
Yikes! Okay.. (I should have read ahead)... this is definitely most
interesting. I'd never have thought the MSDE2000 engine would have supported
2,000 clients on a single machine. It's definitely not a documented
scenario.
>> > Is it the
>> > number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
>> > need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
>>
>> It's based on the number of =clients=.
>>
> The client here for the master server running SE are the replica WSUS
> servers, so I guess its 10 CALS?
You've opened a licensing question that's beyond my skill set. Because you
have *replica* servers, being fed by an upstream Standard Edition server,
there's a big gray area here. Does the SE server require CALs for all
downstream clients, or just the clients being directly fed by the SE server.
I do not know the answer to that question, and I would suggest contacting a
Microsoft Licensing specialist for clarification.
>> Here's a philosophical question for you: Do the *replica* servers require
>> CALs if they get their updates from someplace (as is recommended in the
>> documentation) other than themselves? I do not know the answer to that
>> question -- but now you've got me pondering the answer! ;-)
>>
> Good question. I believe if a replica server is getting their updates
> from Web edition WSUS server or directly from Microsoft, then it
> should not need any CALs.
I would tend to agree, also. But that's just my *opinion*. Again, the gray
area -- the Web Edition server is actually getting approvals and content
(indirectly) from an upstream WSUS server.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
"Harry Johnston" <harry[ at ]scms.waikato.ac.nz> wrote in message
news:ODxxK7AwHHA.1212[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] >>>> Is it the
>>>> number of Replica servers that connect to it (around 10), or would I
>>>> need CAL for every WSUS clients that report to each replica server?
>>> It's based on the number of =clients=.
>> The client here for the master server running SE are the replica WSUS
>> servers, so I guess its 10 CALS?
> No, one for each WSUS client reporting to any of the replica servers.
> Microsoft's licensing is fairly clear; any device or user that makes use,
> directly or indirectly, of a Windows server (except for Web Edition)
> requires a CAL.
The availability of WID on Web Edition gives a whole new replica environment
scenario, now, as well. If "VocalEyes" were to switch the upstream server to
Web Edition/WID, then the CAL requirements disappear completely.
> ... I suppose if you run in per-server mode, technically you only need
> one CAL for every concurrent connection, which is a much smaller number
> ... except that there isn't any obvious way to measure or control the
> number of concurrent connections. (?)
Actually, there is a way to measure the number of concurrent connections.
The first, which documents actual connections, is the IIS log.
The second, which is theoretical mathematics, tells us how many clients in
an environment will be connected at any given time. For a server with 2,000
clients and a default 22 hour detection, the server is servicing a maximum
of 2000/17.6 connections, which is about 114 clients per hour, which is a
bit less than 2 clients per minute. Ten CALs would cover connections up to
about 5 minutes in duration, which is sufficient to cover all but the most
extreme of update distribution scenarios (and those can be managed by phased
distribution to the 2000 clients -- which should be done anyway for that
many clients).
For some reason, and now I don't recall the exact details, the per-server
mode got shot down, though, as not being an authorized licensing scenario
for WSUS.
--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCTS, MCP
Independent WSUS Evangelist
MVP-Software Distribution (2005-2007)
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=30E00990-8F1D-4774-BD62-D095EB07B36E
Everything you need for WSUS is at
http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
And, almost everything else is at
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
.....
|
|
I just sent this question regarding CALs to our MS rep. Hopefully, I
would get a favorable answer.
It would probably end with an economical and political decision where
I have to use the Web Edition and divide the clients connecting to all
WSUS servers I have globally.
Anyways, I just tried a SQL Server Express SP2 install on the Web
edition and installed WSUS 3.0 using it as a database.
That might be the upgrade path that's more acceptable in my
environment.
Thanks to all your contributions!
|
|
|