>>> one runs on bare metal and other runs under a host OS
Actually, that's a sleight of hand. ESX runs on a VMware-cooked Linux Kernel.
So, one can argue that, because it is bundled with its own "OS", ESX does not
really "run on bare metal" in the way some people describe it.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Noah Eiger
Sent: Thu 1/18/2007 4:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
I realize this is now getting a bit OT, but.
Deji, I think the fruit distinction is based on the fact that one runs on bare
metal and other runs under a host OS. (Or at least that is how I have always
thought of them.) Beyond that, I agree there are simply feature comparisons.
That said, (and with the caveat that I have not worked with ESX) I find the MS
product to be much simpler than VM Server (nee GSX). I started halfway down the
path of migrating my MS VMs to VM Server and found it overly complex and the
video emulation performance using the VM Ware client was so bad as to be
unacceptable.
And as to the OP, I have DCs running on MS VS2k5 R2 and have not had any
problems. In the situation you describe, Justin, it seems like performance and
cost would be the deciding factor.
--- nme
From: Akomolafe, Deji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 3:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
:)
Interesting points, again. Did I remember to say that I am biased? I think so.
I expect that I'm going to catch some flaks for what I'm about to write, but
.....
These do not make VS and ESX "apples and oranges". VMotion, Host clustering.
Different nomenclature, different capabilities, same purpose, Resource
allocation guarantee, CPU Resource allocation weight.
Superior Networking capabilities. Sure. Does VS have networking capabilities?
Of course. Does ESX integrate with AD as well as VS? Does it run on Windows?
Support software iSCSI? Live backup and Shadow Copy? (OK, if you count VCB and
its proxy).
Administration - show of hands, quick - ESX or VS, which is easier and less
complex to deploy and administer? Which has easier and faster client deployment
option?
I swear, I have NOT drunk any kool-aid, but I think people's perceptions of the
superiority of ESX over VS is largely driven by a combination of historical
trends, myths, marketing and the unavoidable "Winblows Sux" mentality. Since we
are on a Windows-centric list here, I do not mind admitting that I do not
subscribe to the notion that if it's not Windows, it must be better than
Windows. Mind you, Hunter, I am NOT implying that this is where you are coming
from, but the reason I asked you to enunciate the reasoning behind your
thinking was because I was hoping to hear something I haven't heard before on
this issue.
VS certainly wasn't as feature-rich as ESX a couple of revs back. The gap is
considerably narrowed with what's currently going into VS and what ESX 3.0.1
has today. Will VS catch and surpass ESX in a few months, no. Will it ever
catch up, maybe. But, today, if we factor in the cost overlay (in licensing,
hardware and administrative values), and discount our preconceived (or
received) notions of ESX superiority, and give VS (as of SP1 Beta 2) a fair
shake, one would be pleasantly surprised at how narrow the gap really is.
To me, these 2 products are all bananas - one is a "just banana" and the other
is "organic banana". They are certainly not more "apple and orange" than your
convertible and my jalopy are "apple and orange". They are both virtualization
tools, and they each serve the same purpose. One is cheap (like, FREE cheap,
while giving you liberal Windows licensing terms and flexibility to boot), the
other is not.
Now, I'm off to find my Teflon :)
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Coleman, Hunter
Sent: Thu 1/18/2007 2:21 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
On the Virtual Infrastructure side: Moving running guests across hosts
(vmotion), the network configuration options, lower host overhead, grouping
hosts into resource pools and allowing guests to automatically migrate based on
allocation guarantees, 4-way SMP guests, 64-bit guests :->
Nothing wrong with Virtual Server, but I see it more on par with VMware Server
than ESX/Virtual Infrastructure.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
Interesting points, Hunter.
Not to engage in a holy war or something, but would you mind mentioning what
makes one of these Orange and the other Apple (the fruit)? No, don't mention
64-bit Guest, thank you very much :)[1]
[1]<Grumbling> I wish MS will hurry up on this front already. </grumbling>
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Coleman, Hunter
Sent: Thu 1/18/2007 1:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
IMHO, ESX/VM Infrastructure and Virtual Server are like apples and oranges.
Yes, they are both virtualization environments, but have vastly different
capabilities. VM Infrastructure has a much broader and deeper feature set that
does come with added cost and complexity.
Regardless, in the context of the original question I'd be concerned about the
load Exchange is going to place on the host hardware. How many Exchange users
are in the 8 domains, and how many of these would potentially be connecting to
the alternate site? Are you going to have GC availability to support Exchange?
What other resources at the hotsite might be looking for DC/GC services?
I would also be careful about having a configuration at my hotsite that is
significantly different from my normal production environment. When things have
melted down to the point of failing over to the hotsite, it's not a good time
to be pulling out the manuals for your infrastructure because you don't work
with it day in and day out.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
ESX (VMWare) is good - and pricey. And very strict as to hardware specs. And
complex to setup and administer. And, I could be wrong on this, NOT
(MS)-supported for virtualizing DCs.
Virtual Server, on the other hand, is good, not pricey, less picky, more
supported (I believe it's actually validated) for DCs virtualization. Plus, the
liberal OS licensing scheme is very attractive to me.
Yes, I know, VMWare rules the market. Yes, I am biased.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / | /) /) /)
/---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)
(/
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com - we know IT
-5.75, -3.23
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Salandra, Justin A.
Sent: Thu 1/18/2007 11:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ActiveDir] Remote DC's on Virtual Server
What would you recommend for the following situation.
We are thinking of having a hot site where Exchange will be replicated to a
remote location. Since Exchange will be remote over the Internet, we will need
to have DC's for each domain available in that remote site. (This would all be
going across a VPN)
I was thinking about placing 8 DC's on a VMWare Infrastructure 3 server
Enterprise edition. These DC's would really only be used in the event of a
disaster and people started connecting to Exchange up in the remote site.
Is VMWare Infrastructure 3 good? What would you use?
Justin A. Salandra
MCSE Windows 2000 & 2003
Network and Technology Services Manager
Catholic Healthcare System
646.505.3681 - office
917.455.0110 - cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
