I've got a few questions about virtualising...
Does Hyper-V have anything along the lines of the VMware-converter?
Does it have anything to allow automatic fail-over?
What are the benefits of using a SAN (such as the Sun 7110) over a NAS box such as a Netapp S330?
Also - does anyone have a useful formula for speccing boxes for virtualisation?
One thing that worries me about using a SAN is if you are using one SAN device, if it fails then you lose all your virtual servers, which to me seems a bigger problem than losing one real server.
There is a question as to just how redundant you can make your network. Whatever you do, however much money you spend, you're unlikely to every eliminate the risk of a single point of failure.
By not using a SAN/NAS you lose High Availabilty and Live Migration of your VM's. But by using them the SAN/NAS can become that single point of failure.
IMHO, A well designed SAN with redundant PSU and LAN, RAID5/6 with hot spare drives, connected to a UPS is more preferable than trying to work without a SAN.
Yes but it's only when you start getting into the higher end SAN stuff like EMC that you start getting true redundancy in the SAN and they can cost a lot of money.
On cheaper SANS, even with redundant PSU's, hot spare HDD in RAID, UPS you still have the risk of Fan/CPU/Motherboard/RAID Controller/Memory failures.
You've also got the problem that you are putting the servers running the VM's under higher load and therefore possibly liable to a higher failure rate.
If you go for a clustered SAN to get real High Availability, you then introduce a much higher level of complexity which can cause its own problems.
Yes I can see this being a good solution for large business and universities where you have say 50+ application servers, but I can't see the advantages in a normal school where there really aren't that many servers.
Just thinking aloud really and I'm always careful of the latest coolaid which every man and his dog is trying to sell us!
I was once worried about similar stuff but if you think this technology has been around quite some time now and if huge companies with super secure and always needed data are happy to put everything onto one system like this the we should be fine. where I used to work we has a vm system put in and I saw how good it was I got one in in my new place as soon as possible. as I said earlier in this thread, if you are unsure of going down the VM/SAN route then talk to schools in your area that have setups already.
don't forget also if you don't want to go down the VM route then SAN's still will offer great value as you can connect them to your physical servers meaning you can get away with only needing system drives in your physical boxes and then you can dump all data onto the SAN which is cheap and easier to upgrade. you can also connect a couple of VM hosts to the SAN as a way of progessing across or just for running a test enviroment?
if you are building a machine of from scratch then you don't have to do a P2V conversion - just build from template or ISO or from WDS
Domain controllers are great things on VM's as you can split out roles between VM's to help security. I have a physical Domain Controller as a just in case thing but it's not essential and it's just on a cheap HP rack server (DL120)
Seems to work quite well one of out schools has 0 money and both admin and curric servers are getting on (admin is past it) so i took a p2v copy of it (bear in mind it the dc and has every role all data etc) and dumped it onto a 2008r2 server in the offic running hyperv and apart from a few issues (mainly i haddnt sp2'd the 2003 box it) p2v'd it booted up fine no problems and seemed to work ok as did sims etc. Plan now is to replac vurric server and run admin as a virtual server on that only issue i see is printers a i usually end up using hyperv for 2003 x86 print servers to makemy life easier than trying to find identical x86 and x64 drivers. Im also in the process of playing with termial serve 2008 which im intending to run as a hyper v on the schoool server
Last edited by sted; 14th January 2010 at 03:33 PM.
I would recommend install SCVMM as well its very helpfull and it can do P2V alot better than Disk2VHD can!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)