There is no hard and fast rule because it depends on your environments and loads. So here's some cautionary considerations.
How is your san load? How is the IO on the fibre paths? Direct connect or through a portmaster? IO intensive applications? More then one? WiIl that one destroy the performance of everything on the san? Do you have several 'marginal' high IO apps that if something goes wrong with one, it will destoy IO of the rest? Where I work, we will not/cannot have any time IO sensitive app. So, no SQL, if they put Exchange mailbox servers on VMware, I'd be looking for a new job to avoid the finger pointing (Actually I am so send me leads in Sacramento, ca :). Gateway servers less concerned with Essentially, your whole system becomes a balancing act and you need to make sure you have the tools to monitor and maintain that balance and the effect of adding/changing things in the environment. We run almost 50 VMware host systems in development, testing and production environments and for the most part it does really well. Steven Peck http:www.blkmtn.org On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lots of varied opinions on this subject... > > I (personally) will virtualize almost anything (SQL, Exchange, File/Print, > etc.). The only things I shy away from virtualizing are the FMSO role DC, > Oracle (because of their cpu pricing model), or other servers that are very > cpu intense. Aside from that, I'm willing to virtualize most any box. I > really like the added DR it provides me (we backup data/files on each > server via Backup Exec (VM or physical) but in addition, we also backup the > entire VM flat-file every night (basically an image backup of the server). > Restoring the entire VM flat-file can be done in 20 minutes flat, whereas > rebuilding a crashed server and restoring the data can take hours or more. > > Low overhead boxes are typically the best candidate to virtualize (IMO) but > if you have a very robust virtual host, you can get away with virtualizing > database servers, etc. as well. > > JR > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Fogarty Richard MR - CONTR - Team EITC [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:47:32 -0400 > To: [email protected] > Subject: VMWare / Virtualization > > > When virtualizing a datacenter is there a stand fast rule on what one > can/cannot virtualize? For example, we're not scheduled to upgrade to > E2k7 for some time, so I'd like to virtualize our E2k3 boxes. We've > used the capacity planner and very little of our existing infrastructure > is being taxed. Our SQL boxes run with all of our DBs on a SAN with > fiber channel (as do all of our Exchange stores) - so I'm assuming that > most should be fine. > > > > I know I've heard some of you say that you'd never virtualize > everything, so are DCs the only systems you'd leave on a physical box? > (Mind you, this is outside the obvious systems where you'd get no ROI) > > > Comments? > > Thanks in advance, > > Rick > > > > > > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft(R) Windows(R) and Linux web and application > hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting > > > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
