|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: SUS Server Hardware |  |
- To: "Patch Management Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Subject: Re: SUS Server Hardware
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 08:52:59 -0700
- In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Reply-to: "Patch Management Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 |
| |
SUS runs on low-end hardware. We used it with many more clients on a
lesser box and it worked fine. If anything, the low-end box was helpful in
that its lower performance had the side effect of throttling bandwidth
usage somewhat.
RM
"Evan Mann"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nancial.com> To
"Patch Management Mailing List"
04/29/2004 01:17 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PM gement.org>
cc
Please respond to Subject
"Patch Management SUS Server Hardware
Mailing List"
<patchmanagement@
listserv.patchman
agement.org>
In deploying SUS, I'd like to maximize my bandwidth and deploy a local
SUS server in each of my remote offices, so those local machines get
their patches from that server. In many of these offices, this machine
is a Windows 2003 DC running WINS, DNS, DHCP and file storage. They are
typically 1ghz machines or faster with 512megs of RAM. My newer
machines are 2.4ghz P4's. There is plenty of HDD space.
Would it not be adviseable to run an SUS server on these machines, or
does it not matter? If it's not adviseable, then I'd probably not
deploy a local SUS server and make them update over the WAN (not my
preffered method).
For my main office, I have some spare machines, older Dell PE's in the
700mhz P3 range, 1 gig of RAM. Is this level of machine adequate to
handle 100-150 clients?
---
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| |