- 12 myths about how the Internet works
- Smartphone smackdown: Storm vs. iPhone
- IETF: Should we ignore the Kaminsky bug?
- Top 10 wicked cool algorithms
- How to recession-proof yourself
We tested Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition RTM on a switched Gigabit Ethernet D-Link network using primarily a Dell 1950 server equipped with a dual quad-core 1.6GHz CPU, 32GB of dynamic RAM, two Broadcom Gigabit Ethernet network interface cards connecting it to the network and a QLogic 2GB Fibre Channel card connecting it to our internal storage-area network.
To assess operating system compatibility, we also ran Windows Server 2008 on other servers including an HP585G2 with four, dual-core AMD Athlon 64 CPUs with 4GB of DRAM per card and Compaq NetIntelligent Gigabit Ethernet NICs; three Compaq DL-140 boxes (each with dual Intel Xeon CPUs running at 3GHz). The client machines used in testing included various HP and Apple workstations and notebooks running Windows XP SP2, Windows 2000 Professional, Apple 10.4.11 or 10.5.1.
We imported 100,000 users into the Active Directory using LDIFF, creating 32 groups, and seven administrative domains. After importation, we randomly checked each of the Active Directory components for signs of an accurate importation; it was successful. We then made various changes to users, groups, and policy objects and watched for the changes to appear in the new Windows 2008 AD audit logs. Despite the comparative size, changes were fast.
In terms of performance testing, we ran a series of tests where files and folder were copied using four HP PCs, each formatted with fresh copies of Windows XP SP2 first and then with fresh copies of Vista SP1. We copied identical folders containing 60MB of files (a mixture of files ranging from 1K to 17.2MB) on our Dell 1950 PowerEdge server (no antivirus software was used on clients or server) using a batch file, noting copy execution times. Vista SP1 copies were significantly faster over the Ethernet 10Base-T hub that we connected the PCs to the server with (emulating slower speed links). We also compared streaming times using MP3 files from each server.
We also tested performance between NDIS2 (Vista) and NDIS1 (Windows XP, and various SAMBA clients) for file/folder copy speed performance, and found NDIS2/VISTA clients are strongly favored in busy networks.
We measured simple disk access through file/folder copying on a server (rather than client-to-server) to be the same between Windows 2003 and Windows 2008 Server Editions. We tested iSCSI host and target software, and found it to have the same speed as R2-supported file I/O.
Partner Content
SMART Steps Toward Consolidated Workload Automation
Consolidating job scheduling into a single, comprehensive workload automation solution is a critical first step to effective workload automation (WLA).
White paper on WLA here
A Comprehensive Approach to Practicing ITIL Change Management
Read a compelling whitepaper by EMA, Inc. to learn best practices for integrating workload automation.
Whitepaper here
2 Minutes to IT workload automation
BMC CONTROL-M can put money back into your IT budget and strip the complexity and risk from workload automation.
View video here
Gain a faster, cheaper way to manage workload
BMC CONTROL-M can help you migrate to a workload automation solution to meet your organization’s goals.
Listen here for more info
Comments (1)
Windows 2000 and 2008 servers: Can they read each otherBy Anonymous on October 14, 2008, 8:04 amI'm having a Windows 2000 server on the domain server, and I want to install 2008 Server on the ERP server (BAAN). Can the 2 types of Windows read each other?
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments