running multiple virtual machines on one server

[rasczak]

I'm learning a bit about vmware and virtual appliances/machines in general and had a question for you all.

my 2003 server is setup with a hardware mirror. i know i should have the os drive on it's own mirror but i'll set that up later. I have more ports available to add disks as well. the question is whether or not it is better to partition the current mirror for each vm or add more drives and dedicate those drives specifically for it's on vm? would performance turn out better if i dedicated a drive to each instance? silly question i know, but i'd like to get more info from people who have more experience in this than i do.

thanks!

 

[sourceninja]

If you are going to be running a bunch of 'server' vm's. My advice would be to use vmware esx/vsphere or citrix xenserver, or something similar and not a virtualization product running on top of windows. Especially if you are worried about performance.

 

[rasczak]

If you are going to be running a bunch of 'server' vm's. My advice would be to use vmware esx/vsphere or citrix xenserver, or something similar and not a virtualization product running on top of windows. Especially if you are worried about performance.

I'll look into it. admittedly i have very little experience with these products and am diving head first into them. thanks.

 

[sourceninja]

You can think of them as a virtualization OS. Their sole purpose is to use as little resources as possible and just run and manage virtual machines. Then you stick your 'servers' inside the vm's and let them run.

 

[rasczak]

You can think of them as a virtualization OS. Their sole purpose is to use as little resources as possible and just run and manage virtual machines. Then you stick your 'servers' inside the vm's and let them run.

which one do you prefer and why?

 

[sourceninja]

I have not used xenserver only because when I got into virtualization vmware was at the top. Thus we have a heavy infrastructure of vmware esx (and now vsphere).

I do know that xenserver is high regarded and gives more functionality for free then vmware does with their free version. It really depends on what features you are actually planning to use. In either case you should be able to port your virtual machines between the two (although with a bit of work).

They both have different licensing models for their paid version. VMWare is licensed per cpu and Citrix is licensed per server. If you are planning on paying for support and advanced features that could impact your decision. VMWare also seems to be a bit easier in finding 3rd party consulting companies to help you should you need it.

There are other options then those two as well. Ubuntu has a cloud server that functions in many ways similar to both esx and xenserver. The product they are using for that feature comes from a company called eucalyptus which also has it's own production offerings (and brokers for both xen and vmware).

Virtualization is a huge topic to get into. I suggest just reading about what the free versions of esx and xen can provide you and installing them and seeing which one fits better in your environment.

 

[stlcardinals]

Also, if you are a Microsoft shop, there is Microsoft's Hyper-V to look into.

 

[Nothinman]

Also, if you are a Microsoft shop, there is Microsoft's Hyper-V to look into.

Except that even if you do a CORE install you still get more overhead than you would with ESX or even a minimal Linux installation.

And VMware is still the defacto standard, even though MS is making inroads in the area by bundling a hypervisor with Windows now.

 

[TheKub]

Another vote for ESX\VSphere here. There are 60 day evails for most of VMWares products so you can see what they are with all the bells and whistles. Though with only one ESX\VSphere server a lot of the advanced features are not applicable (DRS,HA,etc).

 

[WobbleWobble]

The gotcha about ESX is it has limited hardware support compared to XenServer and Hyper-V. Especially if you are working with a "whitebox" setup. There are ways to add additional drivers into ESX, but as far as I know, it's not supported.

 

[sourceninja]

Another vote for ESX\VSphere here. There are 60 day evails for most of VMWares products so you can see what they are with all the bells and whistles. Though with only one ESX\VSphere server a lot of the advanced features are not applicable (DRS,HA,etc).

I love DRS and HA. I have two blade servers running at two locations and I love how vsphere can just move vm's around from blade to blade to keep everything running fast. I also love how I can just stick one in maintenance mode anytime I need to move cables, upgrade hardwar, etc and I have no perceived downtime.

 

[TheKub]

The gotcha about ESX is it has limited hardware support compared to XenServer and Hyper-V. Especially if you are working with a "whitebox" setup. There are ways to add additional drivers into ESX, but as far as I know, it's not supported.

This is true but I have installed ESX on a handfull of desktops\hogpodge servers and havnt run into an issue. I think if your going to have an issue its going to be with the NIC\Storage.

 

[sourceninja]

I ran into that issue one time. It was with a really funky fiberchannel card. I replaced it with a qlogic card and all was well.

 

[drum]

I haven't used VmWare so you can use the other posts to form an opinion there but XenServer has worked really well for us and you can't beat the price.
I'm running 13 Citrix servers as VMs spread over 3 XenServer hosts with to more hosts running other various servers.

 

[JackMDS]

Microsoft® Hyper-V™ Server 2008 R2

This is a stand alone Virtual serer machine and it is free.

It is a basic Windows 2008 R2 stripped of its GUI, AD, and the regular server capacity providing just the Virtual Serving capacity of Windows 2008.

There are differences between Hyper-V, VMware, and others. However in most cases those differences do not matter, read carefully all the data sheets and make a technically informed decision regarding your specific needs. The regular Enthusiasts "FanBoy Bickering" is just the expected mundane "Bickering".

Since it is free you can try it and see if it does what you need.

http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/how-to-get.aspx

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732470%28WS.10%29.aspx

 

[RebateMonger]

Microsoft® Hyper-V™ Server 2008 R2

It is a basic Windows 2008 R2 stripped of its GUI, AD, and the regular server capacity providing just the Virtual Serving capacity of Windows 2008.

Also, some folks have written a REALLY nice GUI (using PowerShell) for Hyper-V Server 2008. You can run it remotely or on the Hyper-V box, do your configuration with the nice GUI, and then exit the GUI when done.

Hyper-V PowerPack for PowerGUI.
http://www.powergui.org/shares/powe...ack/Introduction_to_the_HyperV_PowerPack.html

 

[sourceninja]

There are differences between Hyper-V, VMware, and others. However in most cases those differences do not matter, read carefully all the data sheets and make a technically informed decision regarding your specific needs. The regular Enthusiasts "FanBoy Bickering" is just the expected mundane "Bickering"

I'm not seeing any bickering here.

 

[Nothinman]

I'm not seeing any bickering here.

Yea, Jack seems to think having an opinion on something is some level of arguing.

 

[Emulex]

esx is not cheap but it sure as heck runs smooth and easy when it is setup proper.

 

[JackMDS]

Yea, Jack seems to think having an opinion on something is some level of arguing.

Touche!

My believe is that Technology is based on facts and Not Opinions.

Technology forum is Not Cable News, and I am no Glenn Beck. - - D: - :thumbsdown:

 

[JackMDS]

Also, some folks have written a REALLY nice GUI (using PowerShell) for Hyper-V Server 2008. You can run it remotely or on the Hyper-V box, do your configuration with the nice GUI, and then exit the GUI when done.

Hyper-V PowerPack for PowerGUI.
http://www.powergui.org/shares/powe...ack/Introduction_to_the_HyperV_PowerPack.html

:thumbsup:

Thanks.

The actual stuff is here, http://www.powergui.org/entry.jspa?externalID=2142&categoryID=21

 

[Nothinman]

Touche!

My believe is that Technology is based on facts and Not Opinions.

Technology forum is Not Cable News, and I am no Glenn Beck. - - D: - :thumbsdown:

Except that opinions matter heavily as well. For example, PowerShell is a very technically capable language but I hate it because of the verbosity and use of objects where parsing text would be simpler.

When you've got two products that provide basically the same solution the only things left from which to make a decision are the non-technical aspects. And besides cost, most of those are opinion.