0

I've been running RDS with all roles installed on one physical server for a small client, but we are now migrating to 2012r2 and I'm considering splitting the roles up onto two machines.

enter image description here

We won't be installing RDWA or RDVH, just RDG, RDCB and RDSH. Does it make most sense to combine RDG+RDCB on one machine and leave RDSH on it's own on the other?

In response to these excellent questions in a comment:

Do you have a specific need or reason for splitting things up? Is there a problem that would be solved by splitting things up? Does the current configuration serve your needs?

The benefits I'm looking for are:

  1. Easier resource allocation and performance troubleshooting for the RDSH role server because it is only doing one thing
  2. Being able to restart the gateway server without killing active sessions.

Image borrowed from this blog

  • Do you have a specific need or reason for splitting things up? Is there a problem that would be solved by splitting things up? Does the current configuration serve your needs? – joeqwerty Jan 10 '14 at 15:14
  • I've edited in my rationale, thanks for the questions. – Jack Douglas Jan 11 '14 at 12:27
1

It's kinda' up to you. How much redundancy and modularity you want, how much budget you have, etc.

I will say that I think you are at least on the right track by wanting the RD Session Host(s) to be their own individual servers. Those are the components where all the users will be using apps and using the most CPU and RAM.

But you're free to put the Connection Broker wherever you want, really. Same with licensing servers, etc. Remote Desktop Services is one of the most fun deployments to design IMO, because you have so much flexibility in how to design it and tailor it to the task at hand.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.