Want to win a PS4? Go Premium and enter to win our High-Tech Treats giveaway. Enter to Win

x
?
Solved

Iis there any reason that a production operation (vs. test environment)  should not be on VMWare?

Posted on 2008-06-13
6
Medium Priority
?
397 Views
Last Modified: 2010-04-09
Pros vs cons?  Anyone?  With HA or redundant Vmware servers is there any reason for not putting an environment totally on VM and getting away from individual servers?  Thanks.
0
Comment
Question by:Sp0cky
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
6 Comments
 
LVL 14

Expert Comment

by:plug1
ID: 21778979
Absolutely no reason at all,as long as your hardware is sufficient I would advocate having ALL of your servers virtualised, in terms of restoring from hardware outages etc its a breaze.
0
 
LVL 5

Assisted Solution

by:Stappmeyer
Stappmeyer earned 400 total points
ID: 21779691
Remember to consider application support.  If you often rely on vendors, some may not support their applications on VMware or may require moving them to hardware as a diagnostic step.  For example, Microsoft will not support virtualized DCs, but will give Premier support customers best efforts.  Leveraging virtualization for test environments is a no brainer.  Leveraging for all production may not be appropriate based on system utilization.  (If you have an SQL or Exchange cluster that has high utilization, I would not virtualize it.)
0
 
LVL 6

Assisted Solution

by:JapyDooge
JapyDooge earned 400 total points
ID: 21779926
Depends on what kind of production. Virtual Machines usually have a lower performance, this can be a problem when you are controlling factory networks (with plc's and stuff) from a virtual machine. On the other hand, a fileserver really is able to be virtualized for example. It nearly has no load, only filetransfers that are handled by vmware esx itself and only is involved in some file checking and maybe replication.
We are used to virtualize new servers first, and if it does'nt performe that good, we migrate them to 'real' servers. This gives the company i work a 70% of virtualized servers including domain controllers, fileservers, print servers and servers for administrative software. It also allows us to have one dedicated server (or more) per product so conflicts are easyer to locate.
Citrix, IBM Lotus Notes, SQL and Datastore servers are'nt virtualized, but for example a Terminal Services / Citrix licence server can easily be virtualized.

Another thing to not virtualize can be that you have a server controlling some special device that can't be connected or supported trough vmware.
0
Get your Disaster Recovery as a Service basics

Disaster Recovery as a Service is one go-to solution that revolutionizes DR planning. Implementing DRaaS could be an efficient process, easily accessible to non-DR experts. Learn about monitoring, testing, executing failovers and failbacks to ensure a "healthy" DR environment.

 
LVL 58

Assisted Solution

by:tigermatt
tigermatt earned 200 total points
ID: 21780263
A lot of large datacentres are now moving over to virtualised environments because they are so easy to manage, very dynamic and flexible to requirements which change all the time. While it does mean you really need the host server(s) to be much more powerful than usual - since they are actually running two or three virtual machines - the end benefit to the administrators are generally an environment which is much easier to manage and maintain.

So no, there isn't any reason why you can't virtualise your environment, provided that you ensure all your host servers are fully capable of running all the VMs beneath them. Don't couple 5 SQL Server VMs on one host, for example - you could do 2 file and print servers and an SQL Server on a reasonably powerful one though.
0
 
LVL 9

Assisted Solution

by:xcomiii
xcomiii earned 400 total points
ID: 21781869
I've virtualised all but two physical server (and a server based Checkpoint fw). The last physical servers is the Virtual Center itself (had a bad experince running in a VM), and a physical DC/DNS server. The last one is for avoiding any problems when starting all ESX servers from scratch (ie long-term power outage), as ESX and Virtual Center is picky about having an existing DNS structure in place when booting up.

Other then that, I've virtualised about 60 Win and linux servers, including 3 SQL 2005 servers, 4 Exchange 2007 servers, DC, DHCP, fileservers, terminal servers, application servers and so on. Works like a dream and I can provide a much better uptime than if I've only had physical servers. And yes, MS is picky about support if you have virtual servers, but that doesn't stop them from giving you best effort support anyway. In the few cases I had with MS, the impact that virtualisation gives me outweights the downside of MS support not providing fullly support.
0
 
LVL 18

Accepted Solution

by:
larstr earned 600 total points
ID: 21782093
I agree with the above comments. We have run almost all of our production servers on ESX since 2003, including SQL, Exchange, File, Print, DC/DNS (http://download3.vmware.com/vmworld/2006/tac9710.pdf), and quite a few linux systems. Some of the software we use also use USB dongles and we're using AnywhereUSB to solve this (http://www.digi.com/products/usb/anywhereusb.jsp).

The systems we run non virtual are:
* Virtual Center
* Backup server
* Citrix servers (now known as XenApp). All supporting citrix functions are virtual.
* Firewall gateways (management server is virtual)

We also have iSeries and pSeries running non-x86 apps.

It might costs a bit to get started properly as you will normally need SAN infrastructure and a few beefy servers (from the HCL). ESX is dead stable and if you have any reliability problems it's normally related to some bad hw so it's important that the servers are given proper time through hw testing before you put them to production (either by vendor supported tools, or memtest86+ for atleast 72 hours). Also make sure you setup your SAN according to the guide (http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vi3_35/esx_3/r35/vi3_35_25_san_cfg.pdf).

Lars
0

Featured Post

Technology Partners: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

In this article, I will show you HOW TO: Install VMware Tools for Windows on a VMware Windows virtual machine on a VMware vSphere Hypervisor 6.5 (ESXi 6.5) Host Server, using the VMware Host Client. The virtual machine has Windows Server 2016 instal…
Giving access to ESXi shell console is always an issue for IT departments to other Teams, or Projects. We need to find a way so that teams can use ESXTOP for their POCs, or tests without giving them the access to ESXi host shell console with a root …
Advanced tutorial on how to run the esxtop command to capture a batch file in csv format in order to export the file and use it for performance analysis. He demonstrates how to download the file using a vSphere web client (or vSphere client) and exp…
This tutorial will walk an individual through the steps necessary to enable the VMware\Hyper-V licensed feature of Backup Exec 2012. In addition, how to add a VMware server and configure a backup job. The first step is to acquire the necessary licen…

636 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question