Connect. Communicate. Collaborate. Securely.

Home » Kerio User Forums » Kerio Connect » Move Current Kerio Installation to New Hardware
  •  
BobH

Messages: 123
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
We're currently running Kerio Mail Server v6.1.1 on an XP Pro PC. I need to move the installation to a Windows 2003 Std Server. I assume I install Kerio Mail Server on the new Win2K3 server like a new installation. Then unload Kerio on both the old system and the new server, then copy files from old system to new. Can any tell me which folders I have to copy and which folders I shouldn't? Anything else I should watch out for?

Thanks.
  •  
Kerio_ktrumbull

Messages: 597
Karma: 2
Send a private message to this user
  •  
easiconseil

Messages: 144
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
If you can, please, install KMS under a linux system. After 4 month under Windows Server 2003 and many problems, i migrate to linux and now all works well. Windows (especialy 2003) is very unstable and bugged.

--
MaT
Courriel : mat<_at_>pnymail.com
--------------------------------
  •  
sedell

Messages: 1168
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
I have to disagree with that statement. We run KMS on Windows 2003, and it's very stable. It never crashes, and I can only remember having to restart because KMS was acting up twice, and that was a while ago on an older version of KMS.

Scott
  •  
cohcon

Messages: 88
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Sorry, but I also had a ton of problems on win 2003. The move to linux was at the suggestion of one of the support staff. Since moving to linux it's been much more stable, plus I have much more control over everything via the cli environment.

There are a few things to look out for like case sensitivity, but these can easily be taken care of. Plus my boss is scared to touch a *nix system so I don't have to worry about him hosing up the system like he occassionally does some of our win boxes. ;-)

Not looking for a fight over which OS is better, simply stating that I agree with easiconseil and that kms on linux has worked best for me. 'Course it could just be that kms gets more stable with each release...

Best Regards,
  •  
HidS

Messages: 32
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
I have my KMS 6.1 on a 2003 std server and it's never crashed.

Oddly enuf, I am just about to move my KMS install to a new server so thanks for this thread!

I bought the mother of all servers (for a small business anyway) to see if I can speed up KMS performace, esp with KOC.

Is Outlook/KoC slow because of server side or client side? I find it slow even on a P4 3ghz machine with 1Gb of RAM so I am guessing it's server side.

I hope 2 x dual core 2.8 xeons with 15k RPM disks and 4 GB of RAM will speed things up from single standard 2.8 ghz xeon, 10k disks and 2 Gb of RAM!!!!

Am I the only one who finds KOC slow?? Or is this like the same speed as Exchange/Outlook?

If I can speed up KOC and get the winmail.dat problem out, I reckon my users will be pretty happy and my job will be safe.

I should get my new server in the next week so I will report what performance increase i get.
  •  
sedell

Messages: 1168
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
KOC is slow because there's no caching. Instead of looking up info locally, the KOC has got to hit the server every time you scroll the window, or change from folder to folder, or open a message. It's not a processing or memory issue. It's more of a network bandwidth/latency issue. You click a folder, it's got to request the info from the server. The server has to find the info, then send all that data back. The 15K disks may help somewhat with the file IO part, but the increased memory and CPUs won't.

[Updated on: Wed, 30 November 2005 17:45]


Scott
  •  
HidS

Messages: 32
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Well, my current server has 2 x gigabit connections plugging into the network, so it can't be much faster.

Brr, I hope there's at least SOME improvement......

So, is this speed similar to Exchange/Outlook? As long as I can say that, it's not a worry......
  •  
sedell

Messages: 1168
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
Not even close to Exchange. With Exchange accounts, Outlook caches the data.

Scott
  •  
peterj

Messages: 852
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
I'll second that.

Exchange is tons faster, beats KMS/KOC by a mile.

The only time the two are close to comparable is when you have KMS/KOC on very fast hardware and have almost empty mailboxes.

As soon as your mailbox is above about 20mb the KOC is painfully hesitant.

Still waiting for offline cachine mode.... fingers crossed....
  •  
HidS

Messages: 32
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Erm, well, that's ultra disappointing.

Don't get me wrong, I realise that Exchange/Outlook for 100 Gb+ 100 user system would have cost about 7-8 times more BUT u know, Outlook/Koc/KMS could do with speed increase (now that I know Exchange is a lot faster... I thought this kind of performance was standard on this sort of client/server stuff).

To ask my next stupid question, why doesn't KOC/Outlook cache the data?

I don't mean that in a flippant way. I mean, if you are creating a mail system, and u see that the performance of your mail system is THIS slow, and u see that exchange is pretty darn fast, wouldn't u think, let's do something similar?

I presume it's cos it's damn difficult or something.

How fast are other solutions? Kerio do say that MS like to do a lot of their own things which aren't industry standard etc etc (altho considering MS is basically industry standard in that pretty much everyone uses it, I'm not even sure what that means!), what's the performance of other mail systems like? Is it just Exchange/Outlook that is fast?

Or is KMS slow in particular?

(ya, 20 mb mailboxes don't really count.. 250mb-500mb is more standard)
  •  
sonofcolin

Messages: 483
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
HidS wrote on Thu, 01 December 2005 10:34


Don't get me wrong, I realise that Exchange/Outlook for 100 Gb+ 100 user system would have cost about 7-8 times more BUT u know, Outlook/Koc/KMS could do with speed increase (now that I know Exchange is a lot faster

You get what you pays for!

Quote:

I presume it's cos it's damn difficult or something.

Yep.

Quote:

Is it just Exchange/Outlook that is fast?

For what it does (MAPI) it seems like it. As exchange and outlook are part of the same product and are designed from the ground up to work together. Reverse engineering exchange MAPI is not an easy task.

Quote:

Or is KMS slow in particular?

Definitely not. IMAP is fast even on relatively low end hardware. POP & IMAP (industry standards by the way) work very well indeed.

KMS runs on Windows, Linux and OS X. Exchange runs only on Windows. For those of us that do not use windows, Kerio is an excellent groupware / mailserver solution.


  •  
peterj

Messages: 852
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
Quote:

Or is KMS slow in particular?


No, but the question should be "Is KOC slow in particular?"

The answer to that is yes, MDaemon & others outlook connectors' are much faster.

As for Offline caching, we are constantly told it is very difficult - I have to believe this must be true as it was promised for release by the end of 2004.

I should also make the point that exchange is not just much faster because of the caching, even when in online mode (or using older outlook versions) it is nice and fast.

Unfortunately Kerio is not:
Quote:

an excellent groupware solution
whilst the Outlok Connector is as bad as it is currently.

We can still see the potential but it needs to be converted into a better KOC quickly...!


  •  
sonofcolin

Messages: 483
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Maybe I should clarify:
Kerio is an excellent groupware / mailserver solution if you don't use windows/outlook! Yes, KOC may be bad - but I really don't have a problem with this as we don't use it and can only comment from our setup.

As it seems that the orignial poster is concerned with Outlook and KOC, then maybe KMS isn't the right solution if speed is the ultimate goal.
peterj

Messages: 852
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user

How can you say KMS is good for groupware when you are talking about POP3 & IMAP being fast.

POP3 & IMAP do not provide shared calendars/contacts/tasks etc which is what I understand to be mant by "groupware"

& The premium webmail interface where these features are available is similarly slow & often unreliable.

So to clarify:

If you need a good POP/IMAP mail server then KMS is GREAT!!!
Unfortunately there are hundreds of similar & cheaper solutions for this level of functionality.
Previous Topic: Spam double treshold
Next Topic: Requesting feedback from KMS installs with >1000 IMAP users
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: Sun Nov 19 11:33:38 CET 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00579 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.
Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.4.