Makes total sense. -----Original Message----- From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:36 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization
It seems that once MS made the statement cautioning about USN rollback, a lot of people just assumed virtualizing AD wasn't possible instead of understanding the simple warning and the trivial admin concepts behind making it work. **Don't rollback a dc** Simple. If one breaks, work with it like it was physical, not virtual. OTOH, if you understand the concept, it works *very* well in a lab:) I actually currently don't even look after any AD sites that aren't virtualized... jlc -----Original Message----- From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 7:20 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization I'm not aware of any FSMO role issues. Microsoft has a whitepaper on virtualising Active Directory, including issues with USN Rollback when restoring from snapshots. See: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=64db845d-f7a3-4209- 8ed2-e261a117fc6b&displaylang=en Cheers Ken > -----Original Message----- > From: Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2008 10:18 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization > > I've heard about the FSMO role issue as well, just don't understand it. > Simply having those roles (to me) doesn't compute the necessity of a > physical box. Wish I understood the reasoning a bit better. > > I too love the DR portion of it. It's one of the main reasons we're pushing > hard for this to come faster. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:06 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization > > 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 MicrosoftR WindowsR 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> ~ ~ 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> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
