And because it's virtual, having 2-4 CPU's 'allocated' to the VM won't impact the other VM's if they aren't in use...so I would highly recommend a min of 2 certainly....if not more.
-----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of patchsk Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 4:36 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: VM Processors, one or two? ** The ITSM/CMDB is very bulky and there are lot of sub processes like reconciliation,normalization, aie, fts etc... I would suggest you follow BMCs hardware requirement to have better performance in your production env. The last time I spoke to our SA he told me that in a Virtual machine a CPU cannot be compared to physical CPU on one to one basis. In VM ESX basically the SA will create a number of logical partitions from one physical CPU. For example if the physical server has X cpus the SAs can logically make them as 2X or 3X or nX virtual CPUs shared accross number of VMs carved out from that physical server. So only your SA can provide proper guidance on how good is your virtual CPU depending on how he sized the VMs when he created those. The good thing is even if you start with one and since there are VMs you can easily add another cpu if you see bottleneck. On Thursday, July 12, 2012 3:05:44 PM UTC-7, Drew wrote: ** Good afternoon everyone. We're in the process of building a virtual server for a very small ITSM/CMDB/ADDM installation. BMC's hardware docs state that the server should have two processors. We're thinking that we can get by with only one. Any thoughts? Thank you in advance. Drew Shuller Remedy Admin/Developer Soto Cano Air Base Honduras _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
