Virtualising SIMS (and other servers)

[Archipelego1]

Good afternoon all,

 

As some of you will know from previous posts, we're currently in the process of Virtualising our entire estate.

 

As part of this project, I'll be planning in the migration of services from Physical hosts to VM's, which leads on to the questions .....

 

I'll create new DC's and add these to the domain, removing the old Physical DC's. However, what are peoples experiences with other services such as SIMS, file, app and print servers? Is it best to P2V them, or start from scratch?

 

Thanks as always for your feedback and opinions

[Sylv3r]

Our current SIMS server was done from scratch but the previous one was via P2V. I didn't notice any real difference to be honest.

[Steven_Cleaver]

Pretty much same here SIM's is now on new virtual server but was originally P2V and didn't have any issues.

[ozydave]

Same here original SIMS server was from a P2V.

So was my DC

[Reverend_Dan]

During last sims sql upgrade migrated from old physical to new 2012 virtual, had to give it an extra core on top of the recommendations to speed things, but running well now and it's the one thing that actually backs up on DPM without throwing a wobbly every other day

[jertsy]

Ours was from scratch, just a compete reinstall of SIMS and DB.

[mikkydoos]

Both P2V here. No probs at all. I always keep a physical DC running too just in case hosts have a wobbler.

 

Print, SIMS and DC's work very well.

[colly72]

General best practice, always do from scratch wherever possible. We recently moved our SIMS server from physical to virtual. Very simple process.

[blu4]

We have moved from a single server to double virtualised environement in about a week. I have created a brand new domain. Starting from scratch is way easier and nicer to document. The SIMS server was just a matter of creating a high spec'd VM and getting Capita to migrate your database from the old server to the new VM. When we did it I think it took them about a day to get everything across and on day two just a few hours to finish up.

[dry]

The SIMS server was just a matter of creating a high spec'd VM and getting Capita to migrate your database from the old server to the new VM. When we did it I think it took them about a day to get everything across and on day two just a few hours to finish up.

Capita wouldn't do the migration process for us under our current support contract, so I had to go it alone. I really need to write up notes of how I did it to share with everyone.

 

The process was surprisingly straight forwards. Yes, there are a few gotchas to watch out for, but certainly achievable.

 

Main points I'd take away are:

 

- Ensure you've got suitable database backups in place of the 'new' SIMS installation, and TEST THEM

- Allow the new SIMS installation to create the DocStore file structure first, and then overwrite it with your docstore from previous installation

- Thoroughly read the Capita guides first and make sure that passwords comply with their instructions in terms of special characters

[mikkydoos]

I have a 2008 in place upgrade to do soon. I can't imagine it will go well. A full rebuild might be in order for me too.

 

Sims is OK. Its all the other stuff we've got syncing from it out on the net that will be a pain.

 

Txt messaging, Frog........ !

[GreyFox]

I wasn't involved with the migration process from a physical to virtual (Hyper-V) SIMS server at my last place, so I can't say if it was from scratch, or P2V. But I know it used to work ok on ageing physical hardware (as well as SIMS does), then terrible as a VM. Lots of performance issues. I was on the phone and in remote support sessions with Capita for around a year trying to figure out what was causing the issues. They kept on changing the amount of memory SQL would use, taking away our databases and testing it etc. We were eventually told there was nothing they could do, and that it was down to the size of our database. I was in contact with a friend of mine from another school who also had issues with SIMS since virtualising it.

 

As for the rest, it's always recommended to start from scratch - which has already been said, but I've not really noticed any problems converting. Virtual DCs and Print servers work fine. But it's a good idea to have a physical secondary DC, just in case.

[Michael]

Out of curiosity, those of you who've gone fully virtual, what's your disaster recovery solution in the event your Hyper V host goes down, be it hosting SIMS or other?

 

What's your backup strategy? Backup the Hyper V host, and all instances or separately?

[mikkydoos]

Out of curiosity, those of you who've gone fully virtual, what's your disaster recovery solution in the event your Hyper V host goes down, be it hosting SIMS or other?

 

What's your backup strategy? Backup the Hyper V host, and all instances or separately?

 

 

I've got two hosts. Veeam Backup and Replication handles the backup from host-1 and also copies (replicates) the machine to host-2.

 

Host-1 goes down, fire up the machines on host-2 - Sorted.

 

As long as you backup/replicate regularly (like 6 times per working day here) you minimise data loss.

 

Or restore a backup to host-1 if the VM fails e.g. Windoze bombs out.

[Ephelyon]

Out of curiosity, those of you who've gone fully virtual, what's your disaster recovery solution in the event your Hyper V host goes down, be it hosting SIMS or other?

 

What's your backup strategy? Backup the Hyper V host, and all instances or separately?

 

Redundant hosts - one on-site and one off-site. The on-site one runs the RDS server most of the time, so it's not sitting there doing nothing, plus that gives it gobs of juicy resource to work with, so our RDS experience is very smooth.

[Michael]

So is it just SIMS you primarily virtualise or other services?

 

The only reason I ask, is because I'm working on a project whereby I intend to implement Namespaces across a WAN setup, which then ends up syncing in Azure, so I'm thinking what's the purpose or benefit of virtualising in this scenario?

[Norphy]

Out of curiosity, those of you who've gone fully virtual, what's your disaster recovery solution in the event your Hyper V host goes down, be it hosting SIMS or other?

 

What's your backup strategy? Backup the Hyper V host, and all instances or separately?

 

For us, an individual virtual host going down isn't a concern as the hosts are in a cluster. Should a host fail, the cluster will detect the failure and change the host that the VM is hosted on. Users would notice very little, if any downtime.

 

VMs are backed up by Veeam. We have three virtual farms on three sites. Each farm has a local backup repository, the backups on which get replicated to a central one which puts the backups onto tape.

[Michael]

But do you backup your actual Hyper V host as well?

[mikkydoos]

We run VMWare and as far as I know you cant backup the host. Theres no need because it takes such little time to install and should be run from an SD/USB card anyway. Make a copy.

 

The config is backed up in the VM that does the host management. Not sure about the MS method tho'.

 

 

We're fully VM'd except a physical DC (massive emergency) and a whopping big file server (thats being VM'd soon), and some NAS's

Edited December 8, 2016 by mikkydoos

[mikkydoos]

For us, an individual virtual host going down isn't a concern as the hosts are in a cluster. Should a host fail, the cluster will detect the failure and change the host that the VM is hosted on. Users would notice very little, if any downtime.

 

VMs are backed up by Veeam. We have three virtual farms on three sites. Each farm has a local backup repository, the backups on which get replicated to a central one which puts the backups onto tape.

 

 

Are you clustering with VMWare there @Norphy. Whats the product that looks after that failover ?

[Michael]

That's interesting, as of course Hyper V is basically its own OS, whereas VMWare is tiny. A totally different design.

 

With Hyper-V you solve one problem, but then create half a dozen, which is why I ask the question.

[mikkydoos]

That's interesting, as of course Hyper V is basically its own OS, whereas VMWare is tiny. A totally different design.

 

With Hyper-V you solve one problem, but then create half a dozen, which is why I ask the question.

 

I got shot down ages ago on here by saying - 'Why! would you want to virtualise Windows on what is essentially a Windows platform' - Super double-trouble.

 

I wouldnt touch it after using VMWare (which isnt the best at times but its MEGA stable.

[Archipelego1]

Lots of interesting comments and posts, thanks for the feedback and information so far....it's really helpful to see what peoples thoughts are.

[Michael]

I don't mind being shot down, the point is if you don't ask you don't know. As I say, Hyper V solves problems but then creates problems. Be interesting to actually talk to someone who's restored a Hyper V configuration (the actual host and more), but it's interesting that most (it appears) operate a clustered approach, rather than a standalone configuration - it makes sense but then the initial costs are probably high...

 

Again it's one of those situations where you question is buying 2 'super' clustered servers the way to go, or you could possibly buy 5/6 more reasonably priced servers?

[mikkydoos]

4-5K will get you a very decent VHost. You dont have to run 2.

 

1 is as reliable as any other normal server. Depends how mission critical it is and what your setting is.

 

I only put a 2nd host in over the summer. Didnt have any problems before that but one came up spare.