Become a Columnist Microsoft Exchange Site Microsoft Support SiteMSDN Exchange Site

   

Subscribe to OutlookExchange
Anderson Patricio
Ann Mc Donough
Bob Spurzem
Brian Veal
Catherine Creary
Cherry Beado
Colin Janssen
Collins Timothy Mutesaria
Drew Nicholson
Fred Volking
Glen Scales
Goran Husman
Guy Thomas
Henrik Walther
Jason Sherry
Jayme Bowers
John Young
Joyce Tang
Justin Braun
Konstantin Zheludev
Kristina Waters
Kuang Zhang
Mahmoud Magdy
Martin Tuip
Michael Dong
Michele Deo
Mitch Tulloch
Nicolas Blank
Pavel Nagaev
Ragnar Harper
Ricardo Silva
Richard Wakeman
Russ Iuliano
Santhosh Hanumanthappa
Steve Bryant
Steve Craig
Todd Walker
Tracey J. Rosenblath
 
   

Exchange and SharePoint: Two Peas in a Pod?

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5

Server Roles and Responsibilities

Exchange 2000 and SPS are both based on similar core technology and use Microsoft’s Internet Information Services (IIS) to provide HTTP access to applications and data. Even though the backend technologies are nearly identical, the load on the servers is differs for many reasons: 

  • Email and application uses are different. While predicting the use of email is made easier by logs and performance monitoring, predicting the use of an application is more difficult without such baseline comparisons.  

  • Application load varies among the procedures used by the developers. There are many ways to code a function and some methods are more efficient than others. Anything entering or leaving the Exchange Information Store via HTTP also runs through a WebDAV process to ensure proper object definition. A programmatic batch process that moves files in and out of the information store requires high CPU and memory usage. When an Exchange 2000 or SPS server can no longer access the CPU, or if physical RAM is exhausted, end-users can be subjected to delays of several minutes. (Some companies will not extend SPS with custom code. If you belong to this group, you may want to refer to the SPS Capacity Planning guide at http://www.microsoft.com/sharepoint/techinfo/planning/CapPlan.doc.) 

Because of these differences, Microsoft strongly cautions against running SPS and Exchange Server 2000 on the same machine. I was able to find one support article at the Microsoft Web site (search for article reference no. Q290734) indicating that this setup is not supported. Since email is considered mission-critical for many companies, it may not make sense to jeopardize a healthy email server by installing additional software and services, thereby reducing the available memory and CPU cycles for other applications. For most cases, it is better to use a different machine in order to isolate and protect the email environment. 

SharePoint Limitations

The inherent design of SPS often temps people to combine servers. For starters, you cannot replicate workspaces or data to other SPS servers. All workspaces and code executed on an SPS server stays on that server. For example, if you have several locations that connect over the WAN, you are likely to have more than one SPS installation. Each SPS has its own workspace with its related documents. While workspaces and data files cannot be replicated, a large SPS network typically consists of several SPS site servers and a master search portal server that can “connect” the various collections of documents. This allows searches to span several locations even though the workspaces and documents contained therein cannot.

Exchange and SharePoint: Two Peas in a Pod?

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5

Disclaimer: Your use of the information contained in these pages is at your sole risk. All information on these pages is provided "as is", without any warranty, whether express or implied, of its accuracy, completeness, fitness for a particular purpose, title or non-infringement, and none of the third-party products or information mentioned in the work are authored, recommended, supported or guaranteed by Stephen Bryant or Pro Exchange. OutlookExchange.Com, Stephen Bryant and Pro Exchange shall not be liable for any damages you may sustain by using this information, whether direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential, even if it has been advised of the possibility of such damages.

Copyright Stephen Bryant 2008