Great feedback from both, thank you very much. I will take this information and think about what my next move might be.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "s1mhall" <s1mhall@...> wrote:
>
> A couple of ways this can be setup, as John mentioned a separate switch is one.
>
> The crossover method us another, if you have the spare network connections in your server (most do these days), most high end cards now will do the crossover automatically for you, so you should not need a crossover cable. The simplest way of directing network traffic between the two servers over this connection is to add entries into the hosts file in each server with the name and IP address of the server that you want to that server to connect to. i.e on the db server the hosts file would point to the app servers name and IP and vice versa on the APP server.
>
> The best way to test the difference between going through your existing network and a dedicated one is to use a robocopy script and copy a file of known size from each server to the other server.
>
> You can use the FSUTIL command (in windows) here is the syntax
> fsutil file createnew <name of file> <size in bytes>.
>
> I've been using a 100GB file. Robocopy gives you a good summary that you can output to file for analysis.
>
> The third method is to use a VLAN. (you can use this to separate network broadcast traffic on network segments). A good example of this would be if you were using MS Network Load balancing, the heartbeat packet can flood a network with traffic. Putting the network connections involved in the cluster in a separate VLAN can eliminate effecting the rest of the network. So using a VLAN to connect the APP and SQL server can keep those nasty broadcasts from other devices away from those connections. There are plenty of good indepth articles on the web about VLANS.
>
> By the way I am not a network expert, but this is what I have picked up on the way on my IT journey
>
> SH
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, John Driggers <waffqle@> wrote:
> >
> > We used to do this when we ran clustered exchange. Microsoft recommends it
> > in some cases. That said, we didn't notice much improvement.
> >
> > I'd check the utilization of your existing network interface and switch
> > before you add another link. Simply cutting the switch out of the picture
> > won't yield a substantial improvement unless the current link is
> > approaching saturation.
> >
> > I'm assuming you've already got a GB switch dedicated to your servers and
> > they aren't just randomly plugged into your main switch bank.
> >
> > *John Driggers*
> > **
> > *Chief Data Wrangler*
> > *
> > *
> > *I have an Epicor blog <http://usdoingstuff.com/>. How useful is that?*
> > *
> > *:: 904.404.9233
> > :: waffqle@
> > :: http://www.usdoingstuff.com <http://www.usdoingstuff.com/>
> >
> > *
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Anon <jgiese@>wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > Has anyone had experience, under a split install, of running a crossover
> > > cable nic to nic on the servers and directing everything from server to
> > > server over their GB lans? I would assume you would have to use the statics
> > > for each nic, each direction, in the configs for Epicor and SQL?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>