Enterprise Software Thread, Pro's and Cons - Hyper-V vs VMWare in Technical; Hi all,
I'm just weighing up a few options at the moment as it's the time when my VMWare subscriptions ...
3rd February 2014, 10:50 AM #1
Pro's and Cons - Hyper-V vs VMWare
I'm just weighing up a few options at the moment as it's the time when my VMWare subscriptions come to the point of renewal.
Having never even used / tested/ or really looked at Hyper-V whats the benefit of using that over VMWare ?
In my understanding Hyper-V runs on Windows (2008 & 2012?) so what if your server becomes compromised ? Is this a risk where all my Virtual Machines could be at risk too ? By that I mean if the OS goes down does Hyper-V go with it ?
HOw easy is it to cluster Hyper-V servers and restore VM's in case of failure ?
I do have a couple of Xen / KVM / oVirt servers BUT I don't run them on my production network. At the moment I have one server running ESXI 4.1 and one running ESXI 5.5.
What is your opinions ? Please Discuss!
3rd February 2014, 11:03 AM #2
i have been looking at Hyper-V as well (been testing hyper-v server 2008 ) and so far been please with it runs nicely and is pretty straight forward getting something simple up and running, im just using local storage at the moment so havent used any of the clustering bits yet as this requires SAN/shared network space i dont have currently.
if you using hyper-v as role in Win Server if the host has a problem it can effect the guests (power outage etc)
i need to investigate options for backing up and restoring VM's as well heard good things about veam not sure on cost though or if there are tools which MS provide for back and recovery
3rd February 2014, 11:08 AM #3
The support for linux machines in Hyper-V is awful as far as I am away.
@SHimmer45 - If you go with the newer versions of Hyper-V I don't think you need a San to do clustering.
Hyper-V is simple and ok but i would still go VMware all the way.
3rd February 2014, 11:20 AM #4
We run three Server 2012 Datacentre in a cluster off our SAN and it just "works" run Linux & Windows guests.
We did look at VMWare as well just could justify the cost over HyperV that did all we needed.
3rd February 2014, 11:25 AM #5
Setup VMware before Hyper-v got acceptable and had the basic VMware features, now worth looking at.
I still personally prefer the lack of windows as the host OS and vCenter > SCVMM
3rd February 2014, 11:33 AM #6
@Glennnda that be all the fuss about SVR2012 Storage Spaces/SMB3?
i read a bit about people who have two complete boxes with one for live fall over (so you pull a plug on one box and the other detects its missing) but could quite get my head around how AD would work with that as that is essentially what having multi DC's and GC's is for)
3rd February 2014, 11:35 AM #7
Yes - but only for the very latest versions - lots of companies still have legacy systems which Hyper-V doesn't play ball with well.
Originally Posted by clodhopper
3rd February 2014, 11:39 AM #8
We're running a mixture of older CentOS 5.4 - 6.x & Ubuntu9 to 12.04 and they're all happy, even does live migration.
3rd February 2014, 11:55 AM #9
@chodhopper what do you use for live migration?
3rd February 2014, 12:21 PM #10
We have recently migrated from VMware ESXi managed by Vcenter to a HyperV cluster managed by SCVMM. VMware is undoubtedly the better product but HyperV has got to the point where we have found it's "good enough". Considering what a System Center license and a Windows Datacenter license costs, we couldn't even begin to justify the cost of VMware any more.
HyperV has so far proven to be fast and reliable and it was relatively easy to set up. SCVMM has its quirks and frankly I think Vcenter is a better product but as I say, it works well enough. The Linux guest support is limited but as long as you stick with Microsoft's supported distributions you'll be OK.
Last edited by Norphy; 3rd February 2014 at 12:22 PM.
3rd February 2014, 12:33 PM #11
@SHimmer45, just the stuff built into HyperV
3rd February 2014, 12:36 PM #12
i must be missing something obvious as i have only seen the export function using the Hyper-V manager tool
3rd February 2014, 12:38 PM #13
@SHimmer45, added to 2012 IRC. You're looking for "Move" in the context menu's.
3rd February 2014, 12:40 PM #14
Failover Clusters are easy to set up - it is quite literally an Add Feature wizard. If one host goes down, the VMs running there are booted automatically on the other host. If you are taking a host down yourself, SCVMM makes it half a dozen clicks to put a host into maintenance mode and live migrate all the running machines with no interruption.
I set up virtualization Summer 2011 here and it was pretty straightforward. Server 2012 has made it even better (memory dedupe for one). I suspect VMWare is still better, but for a school environment, I've never found Hyper-V lacking.
3rd February 2014, 12:43 PM #15
ahh ok only running Hyper-V Server 2008 so looks like it would be worth changing the test bed to 2012 which means having a management machine with SVR2012 or Win8 as i think they changed server manager and the older OS's cannt connect
Originally Posted by tmcd35
apologies for the serious thread hijack
By Joe-WLS in forum Internet Related/Filtering/Firewall
Last Post: 27th April 2012, 03:39 PM
By Little-Miss in forum Hardware
Last Post: 23rd May 2011, 02:00 PM
By kennysarmy in forum Virtual Learning Platforms
Last Post: 10th September 2008, 10:51 AM
By eddiebaby in forum Courses and Training
Last Post: 3rd May 2007, 06:22 PM
Last Post: 4th April 2006, 11:26 AM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)