> Taking a look at the potential implementation of virtualization and have > several questions: > > > > 1. Does/should utilization of a SAN have a direct impact on > virtualization decisions? Is it better to go with local or SAN > storage?
1. Roger, if you use a SAN you will get more out of your virtualization infrastructure. Example. In VMware's case you cannot use vmotion if you do not have a SAN. Also, without a SAN vmware is unable to load balance your VMs between hosts automatically. SANs are expensive. There is free software (Open filer) that can be used to turn any server into a SAN. We have chosen to move to VMware and have implemented local storage on a pair HP DL 380s. We will be moving to a SAN year two. It was just too hard to swing the new hardware and Vmware and a SAN in the same year. > > 2. Do vendors who normally require a dedicated server accept a > virtualized server as equivalent? 2.Most vendors I have worked with are "onboard" with virtualization. I will say we have one vendor who does not give its blessing to virtualization at the moment. We have challenged the vendor to provide reasons why they do not support virtualization and a road map as to when their software will support it. > > 3. What type of servers (DB, Oracle, F&P, etc.) don't make good > candidates for virtualization? I would think that SQL/Oracle would > probably be least recommended. 3. SQL 2008 is fully supported in Microsoft's hypervisor. I can tell you that I am running a couple of SQL 2005 databases on Vmware esx and have had no problems. Building a virtual server is not that much different than building a physical one. i.e. SQL likes spindles and ram. As long as the hardware available to the hypervisor is adequate you should be fine. Just like a physical server YMMV and you will want to test. > > 4. Is clustering still possible with VMs? 4. I think so but, I have not set it up. > > 5. What kind of logic determines the best combination of > host/guests? IOW, is it recommended to put all F&P servers together on > one host, or should it be a combination of F&P, DB, etc.? 5. The answer to that question will vary. If you put all of your F&P on one host and that host dies, you lose access to all F&P services. (If you have a SAN and vmotion the VMs would be directed to another host. If you have local storage and a product like replicator you could bring the VMs up on another host that was replicated to, it just would not happen automagically like with vmotion) Obviously, you do not want to put all of your DCs on one host. Think load balancing. If you have a database that has to serve 2000 clients maybe you put a couple low utilized servers with it. I have only scratched the surface on what virtualization can do. > > > > TIA! > > > > > > > > Roger Wright > > Network Administrator > > Evatone, Inc. > > 727.572.7076 x388 > > > > > > _____ > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ Think green. Please consider the environment before printing ************************************************************************************************************************* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you. **************************************************************************************************************************** ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
