Connect. Communicate. Collaborate. Securely.

Home » Kerio User Forums » Kerio Connect » How many User do you have?
  •  
NuStiu

Messages: 20
Karma: -1
Send a private message to this user
Hello,

I'm interested if is someone here with more than 500+ mailboxes.
If so i would appreciate any feedback .

I have to implement a 1000 Users solution and i need to know what are the hardware and software requirements.
What are the problems you have and what are the work around i need to make.

Thank You
Adrian
  •  
mrman

Messages: 20
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Hi Adrian:

Where are you from?

The performance of KMS with more than 500 mailboxes is great! No problem at all.

Now the system requirements are the ones you can check in the Kerio main page. If you can increase those, that would be great! Anyway, I suggest a modern computer, with at least 1 or 2 gb of RAM and a high speed and capacity hard disk (160 GB'S or higher) if possible.


Regards.
  •  
My IT Indy

Messages: 1262
Karma: 40
Send a private message to this user
My largest installation is 450 users and what they use is an eSata 16 drive RAID 10 solution for storage of the mailstore. Disk speed is essential for fast performance with Kerio. Or consider going Fiber Channel to some sort of Raid 10 solution for maximum speed and redundancy.

Kerio stores email as individual files, not in a database format. This has it's advantages and disadvantages.

-
My IT Indy
Kerio Certified Reseller and Hosted Provider
http://www.myitindy.com
  •  
NuStiu

Messages: 20
Karma: -1
Send a private message to this user
Hello,

I'm from Romania.

What platform do you use?
You have all services(antiviru, antispam,webmail, storage) running on the KMS?



Thank You

Adrian
  •  
My IT Indy

Messages: 1262
Karma: 40
Send a private message to this user
I've used OS X Server, Windows, and CentOS for server setups. I like CentOS for the price and hardware support of most raid cards.

I have run all services and not had a bit of trouble. The CPU utilization on a KMS installation is relatively low, it's mostly disk access that you have to watch out for.

I sent you a PM with some more information.

-
My IT Indy
Kerio Certified Reseller and Hosted Provider
http://www.myitindy.com
  •  
mrman

Messages: 20
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Hi Adrian:

I use Windows Server 2003 for the time being. I'm not thinking of changing O.S. by now and everything is working fine.

With that amount of mailboxes, you should consider implementing a server O.S. such as Windows 2003 or 2008 and a high RAM.

Regards
  •  
rkovelman

Messages: 63
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
I would suggest disk spindle speeds of 15,000 rpms at a minimum. Anything less will impact the service. I run a server with just a tad under 100 users. My disks are 15,000 rpms and there in a mirror configuration on a 10.5 server. The server has 4 GB of ram as well, quad core. This server runs other services but Kerio itself probably uses around 2GB of memory between Kerio's sendmail and the spam function. I have the antivirus running to but I dont see high amounts of Memory used.
  •  
My IT Indy

Messages: 1262
Karma: 40
Send a private message to this user
15K drives are nice, but I've seen some raid arrays with 7200 rpm drives that handled loads of several hundred users without breaking a sweat.

It's a balance between storage speed and capacity.

-
My IT Indy
Kerio Certified Reseller and Hosted Provider
http://www.myitindy.com
  •  
rkovelman

Messages: 63
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
When you deal with designers and large files you want fast speeds Smile I also have the 2 ports on the xserve binded together to allow for 2GB uplink. Granted the only time this is useful is when backup occurs and I get a 40-60MB through-put. Otherwise a 1 GB is fine.
  •  
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
rkovelman wrote on Wed, 22 October 2008 21:55

When you deal with designers and large files you want fast speeds Smile


I think in the email world a 'large file' is a relative statement. A 50Mb email is extraordinarily large, but still peanuts for any hard disk. (We are talking storage here Cool ) For Kerio Mail Server throughput performance is not so important, low latency access is. Therefore most people's recommendation to use 15k RPM drives with Kerio. Of course, going for a RAID-setup with many lower speed hard drives (say at least 10) will also improve latency, since some of the concurrent reads can be done simultaneously.

Still, I'd recommend against it, cause concurrent writes will still be slow. I think for Kerio you first need to think "how much Gb do I need" and then "how can I get that ammount with as little latency as possible". Then you'd better spend the money on 15k RPM SCSI drives and forget about 7200RPM SATA.

[Updated on: Thu, 23 October 2008 15:16]

  •  
campodoro74

Messages: 119
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
I'm running Kerio 6.6 on a ESX 3.5 server (dual core 1.86Ghz) with 8GB memory (2GB assigned to Kerio) using a 4x 15k RPM SAS RAID 5. We have 70 concurrent users, 20% KOFF, 10% webmail, 70% KOC, with large mailboxes (4GB is the average) and the VMware server is bored...
  •  
rkovelman

Messages: 63
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
4GB mailboxes? You don't do any archiving?
  •  
campodoro74

Messages: 119
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Would love to but management wants to have ALL the mail (from 2002) available at all times; they all use desktops, laptops and iPhone symotaniously and so archiving can be a pain.

If you have a better option, would love to hear it (but not in this topic).
  •  
elias

Messages: 114
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
winkelman wrote on Thu, 23 October 2008 06:15

Still, I'd recommend against it, cause concurrent writes will still be slow. I think for Kerio you first need to think "how much Gb do I need" and then "how can I get that ammount with as little latency as possible". Then you'd better spend the money on 15k RPM SCSI drives and forget about 7200RPM SATA.

I second this statement.

The original poster was asking about a 1000 user solution. If you have 1000 users, and the budget to pay Kerio for a 1000 user license, then you also have the budget for 15k SCSI or SAS drives. Trying to skimp by using SATA drives is just silly given the size of the proposed installation.

We didn't get a lot of information about user usage and if they'll be webmail based, KOC, or KOFF, or how heavy those mail users are. I think for relatively light usage, the bare minimum would be 10 15K SAS drives in RAID 10. But if they were my users which are absurdly email heavy, then I'd be prepared to double or triple the number of drives.

Bottom line: disk IO is the single most important factor for KMS performance. For large installations or very heavy user usage, don't skimp on drives, and don't try to get away with using RAID levels other than 10.

-Elias
rkovelman

Messages: 63
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
elias wrote on Thu, 23 October 2008 13:29

winkelman wrote on Thu, 23 October 2008 06:15

Still, I'd recommend against it, cause concurrent writes will still be slow. I think for Kerio you first need to think "how much Gb do I need" and then "how can I get that ammount with as little latency as possible". Then you'd better spend the money on 15k RPM SCSI drives and forget about 7200RPM SATA.

I second this statement.

The original poster was asking about a 1000 user solution. If you have 1000 users, and the budget to pay Kerio for a 1000 user license, then you also have the budget for 15k SCSI or SAS drives. Trying to skimp by using SATA drives is just silly given the size of the proposed installation.

We didn't get a lot of information about user usage and if they'll be webmail based, KOC, or KOFF, or how heavy those mail users are. I think for relatively light usage, the bare minimum would be 10 15K SAS drives in RAID 10. But if they were my users which are absurdly email heavy, then I'd be prepared to double or triple the number of drives.

Bottom line: disk IO is the single most important factor for KMS performance. For large installations or very heavy user usage, don't skimp on drives, and don't try to get away with using RAID levels other than 10.

-Elias


I am curious why you are pushing raid 10? I use raid 1 which works fantastic. I would or should say make sure this is a hardware raid and not a software raid. With a raid 10 you are still performing just as fast as you would be with a raid 1. If one disk fails in a raid 1 the other one will keep going. With a raid 10 depending on the hardware you might have to take the server down change the config and turn it back on live. With the new xserves for example there is only 3 bays, so a raid 10 will not work. A raid 1 will which is what I have. I havent seen a raid 10 really perform in a way another will and better. A raid 5 is the best but again speed becomes an issue.
Previous Topic: Frequent problems with the shared public folders
Next Topic: iCal Not Syncing All Events
Goto Forum:
  


Disclaimer:
Kerio discussion forums are intended for open communication between forum members and may contain information and material posted by members which may be useful in learning about Kerio products. The discussion forums are not intended to provide technical support for any specific product. Any information implied or expressed in the discussion forums is that of the posting member. Kerio is in no way responsible for the information posted in the forums, or its accuracy. Kerio employees may participate in the discussions, but their postings do not represent an offical position of the company on any issues raised or discussed. Kerio reserves the right to monitor and maintain the forums to promote free and accurate exchange of information.

Current Time: Tue Nov 21 20:37:10 CET 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00496 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.
Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.4.