What can/should I Virtualise?
Over the summer I'll be getting a couple of new servers to replace our two oldest, and I'm interested in a): the idea of using virtual servers on these to help cut down the number of servers I have, and b): the idea of being able to restore a server very quickly in the event of a server dying. So I'd like to hear from those of you who have already done this with your thoughts on our setup.
Currently we have 6 servers:
1. DC, DNS, DHCP, WSUS, IIS, McAfee Updates
2. DC, DNS, Fileserver (110GB data)
3. SQL (sims + a couple of smaller databases we've built) (20GB data)
4. Moodle (10GB data)
5. Exchange, Ranger Outpost, DC (I know it shouldn't be, but the guys who did the install did it this way and it hasn't caused any problems - touch wood)
6. just one IIS instance
The 2 oldest servers I will be replacing are 1 & 2. So here are my thoughts on virtualising
1. VM1 - DC, DNS, DHCP
VM2 - WSUS, McAfee Updates, IIS (from both IIS machines as WSUS needs it anyway)
2. VM1 - DC, DNS
VM2 - Fileserver
VM3 - Ranger Outpost
3. VM1 - SQL
Does that look reasonable?
Does it make sense to virtualise the fileserver when it holds so much data - and will increase in datasize? (taking into account that we can't afford a SAN)
Is SQL happy on a VM?
What about Moodle, would that be happy as a VM on the same box as SQL, thereby reducing the number of servers required to 4?
VMWare or Virtual Server (free editions - can't afford ESX)
I also know you need plenty of memory on the host servers to run a number of VMs. I'm looking at HP DL380s for the servers. If I go with more than 4GB of RAM fro each server, do I need to run a different version of Server 2003 (currently running Server 2003 Standard) to access all the available memory?
Any advice or thoughts would be most welcome.