Upgrade time: Windows Server 2008 64 bit and Pastel

I

InTheCube

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
4,581
Reaction score
87
Location
InTheCube.co.za
Hi.

I am in the process of upgrading the server of one of my clients, and require some expert knowledge, comments and suggestions.

My client currently has Windows Server 2003 installed on a 4 year old desktop server. They have about 20-30 users on the network, who mostly work with files stored in a shared folder on the server. We also have about 10 users who regularly make use of Pastel. We have a Pastel 'server' installation on the server, with client installtions on the 10 other machines.

Now we need to upgrade the hardware, and I am considering upgrading to Windows Server 2008 as well. I am considering upgrading to a 64bit environment, but I am not sure of the consequences of doing so.

Some questions:
1. Does the Intel Xeon processor/architecture support 64 bit? Does it support both 64 bit and 32 bit architectures?
2. Is it recommended to make the switch to 64 bit now, since seeing Microsoft will no longer be releasing any more 32 bit server OSs?
3. Will Pastel run on a 64 bit architecture? Is there a native 64 bit Pastel version, or will it and can it run in 32 bit emulation mode on the 64 bit arhitecture, and if so, is this recommended?

Thanks in advance.
 
To answer some of your questions:

  1. Xeons are indeed 64bit capable chips and have been so for a few years now
  2. I would suggest that is the best time to move, since as you said Microsoft won't be releasing any more 32bit server OS's
  3. Pastel in theory should run fine. It is not 64bit natice, but 32bit apps run pretty much as normal on 64bit.
I do urge caution and testing though, since Pastel can't even get their software to run on Vista with UAC, more than 3 years later. From what I heard, they haven't even begun testing on Windows 7 yet.

Good accounting package, but poorly designed for networks and new versions of Windows.
 
Personaly I would recommend that you leave the server alone with Pastel. Keep as a dedicated Pastel system. Its got all its required licences.

Then rather setup a 2nd server with 2008 and better hardware. Sometimes its just beter to leave things alone that ain't broke - and this is most true with Pastel.

BTW, not knocking but just asking: Have you ever installed Pastel (terminal instances) on a server before?
 
cbrunsdonza said:
Personaly I would recommend that you leave the server alone with Pastel. Keep as a dedicated Pastel system. Its got all its required licences.

Then rather setup a 2nd server with 2008 and better hardware. Sometimes its just beter to leave things alone that ain't broke - and this is most true with Pastel.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good idea initially, but I don't want to end up managing 2 servers for very long. But if the Pastel support on Vista and servers is that bad, this might be my only option.

cbrunsdonza said:
BTW, not knocking but just asking: Have you ever installed Pastel (terminal instances) on a server before?
Click to expand...

Nope, haven't installed Pastel ever before. I'm not even sure how it is set up on our network. It's all very weird - with specific Pastel shared folders being accessed on the client machines, through a client instance.
 
Not so sure how well Server2003 and Server2008 integrate with each other but it will be less painful than installing Pastel.

Our company spent a packet on getting Pastel installed. Its was a nightmare. Personally I'm glad I never pursued my crazy idea of becoming a Pastel Sysadmin.


Since your anyway going to nuke the original install why not deploy a new server alongside the existing one. This way you have minimal downtime. It will also give you time to migrate the Pastel or you might find that keeping it on its original box is the best.

From experience its sometimes beter to have an old server running in a happy state than try to migrate to newer hardware.
 
DJNgoma said:
Why haven't I heard the mention of Windows Server R2 being mention? (Waits for Conradl to reply)
Click to expand...

Was actually typing a response about how the OP should install a free Hypervisor, and P2V the orginal machine when my power died :) But yeah, it would be a good idea to virtualise the server:

You then get to keep the server in its orginal form and not break anything.
You can get much better usage of your hardware, i.e. you can install a virtual linux server on the same hardware.
DR built in....

Of course I would recommend a free Xen (Citrix or other) over MS Hyper-V; which is a fat bloated beast....
 
Conradl said:
Was actually typing a response about how the OP should install a free Hypervisor, and P2V the orginal machine when my power died :) But yeah, it would be a good idea to virtualise the server:

You then get to keep the server in its orginal form and not break anything.
You can get much better usage of your hardware, i.e. you can install a virtual linux server on the same hardware.
DR built in....

Of course I would recommend a free Xen (Citrix or other) over MS Hyper-V; which is a fat bloated beast....
Click to expand...

Could you please say this again in English..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X