VMWare's got an interesting white paper out on SQL Server 2005 performance, comparing running on 32 bit and 64 bit OS's, worth a quick flick through:
http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/SQLServerWorkloads.pdf From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 July 2008 14:00 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? I have one that is over 6GB with about 75-100 people hitting it, very heavy usage. This particular one has been virtualized for 5 years. We've had issues with it once on performance when we applied an update from the vendor, they determined that we needed to truncate the DB to get it smaller, funny thing was, it was really an issue with the way their update was programmed. Calls to the database were causing it to do a full query on all the tables to enumerate the next sequence number. So the performance issues were not because of virtualization, it was because of bad programming. Everything else is much smaller (~1GB) in size with a maximum of 12-20 people using them. On 7/22/08, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them? Dave From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues. We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual. Some of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc. On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It uses an SQL database (http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest% 20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf) <http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest% 20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> . We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a server has come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more. If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server? From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work. What application specifically are you looking at that says this? We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work, then go to physical. So far, we're doing really good with that approach. 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked. Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for virtualization. Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX. So, I can't say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX..... On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine. Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements. Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server OS). As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm missing something. Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke === STEMCOR CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLAIMER NOTICE This e-mail is intended only for the addressees named in it. The contents should not be disclosed to any other person nor copies taken. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Stemcor unless otherwise specifically stated. Stemcor does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message nor responsibility for any change made to it after it was sent by the original sender. You are advised to carry out a virus check before opening any attachment as Stemcor does not accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of any software viruses. You should be aware that Stemcor reserves the right to read incoming and outgoing emails. === ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
