I have a set of servers with gigabit NIC's and a collection of 10/100 desktops. I wanted to see if I can configure as follows:
All servers and internet router connect to a Gigabit switch.
All 10/100 devices connect to a 10/100 switch.
The gigabit connects over to the 10/100 switch with a patch cable.
Would this be too much of a bottleneck or better to run all devices on one large switch. Max of 48 ports needed.
Price is an issue.
Comment direct to
Jon
should be fine.
the bottle neck is going to exist on the 10/100 devices anyways. it doesn't matter that the switch is 10/100 as none of the devices on that switch could utilize any more speed.
make sure you use a crossover.
Yes, it will work, but there will be a bottleneck between any devices on the 10/100 switch going to a device on the gigabit.
If you are only concerned with maximizing data transfer between servers, then you are still fine. 10/100 is suitable for most users anyway.
Well, you would probably be better connecting everything to one device. but unless the 10/100 devices get upgraded to 1000 as well, there's really no point at this stage. I'd wait until you either upgrade those systems to gigabit capability.
I doubt the current setup is causing any significant bottlenecks. The 10/100 devices will run as fast as they can on that switch, and the data coming into the 10/100 switch from the gigabit switch will never go faster then 100 anyway.
If you have bandwidth control software and are looking at general web browsing as a max bandwidth scenario, then your setup will be fine. unless you have a video farm that needs to connect gigabit switches to other high speed networks then I can't imagine you would have much trouble administering that network.
For the cheapest price find a local computer recycling center and see if they would allow you to sift through old hardware (switches).
The answer is going to depend heavily on your inter-network traffic. Depending on the volume of server traffic from your local network you might notice significant lag if multiple stations are attempting to access large amounts of data simultaneously, especially if your heavy users are all located on the same 10/100 switch. if the users that hit the servers most frequently can be distributed across the 10/100 switches your network will thank you.
If all the stations only talk to the servers and not to each other then multiple switches should not be an issue. if the stations do talk to each other (shared printers or shared folders) you should consider grouping the stations together by resource pool. if all stations need access to all other stations in addition to the servers then a single switch would be a better option.
Generally speaking since price is an issue it should be fine to run the network you have described, and upgrade as income allows.
It's Working, sure for your pc connection will be the bottle neck.
It's will only increase the performance between your servers.
For Internet it's change anything, maybe I'm wrong but I don't think you have a 100mb or 1000mb internet connection, I'm pretty sure it's around 5 to 20mb.
You have a limit of switch you can connect on the main SWITCH and you have a Limit for number of switch you can cascade.
We have the same problem here and the best solution it to buy a new manageable switch that can contain all our user.
The price it little higher but it's working great, you can buy smaller equipments to reduce the price but if the performance it's not increase you have spent money for nothing.
Best regards