gberryman
asked on
Hyper V implementaion
I am looking to put our to current servers into one and am looking for input to whether it can even be done. I want to put our two existing servers (Server1 & Server2) on the new Hyper V Server. Server1 provides user authentication (AD etc..) and runs a small accounting program and Server2 runs terminal services to give remote access to users using the accounting program on Server1.
Is this possible and is there any good documentation on terminal services (or remote connections) running in the virtual machine somewhere?
Thanks in advance.
Is this possible and is there any good documentation on terminal services (or remote connections) running in the virtual machine somewhere?
Thanks in advance.
I have setup multiple VMs that run TS server without any problems. I would suggest removing the Accounting software from the DC then create another VM for this accounting software.
http://itproctology.blogspot.com/2009/07/terminal-server-on-hyper-v.html
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/24335176/Terminal-Services-as-a-Hyper-V-virtual-machine.html
http://itproctology.blogspot.com/2009/07/terminal-server-on-hyper-v.html
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/24335176/Terminal-Services-as-a-Hyper-V-virtual-machine.html
We run a mix of physical and virtual. I would be a bit leery of virtualizing my entire AD, especially if they all ran off the same physical server and/or used the same storage backend. Ideally you want to DCs anyway, so one physical and one virtual would be good.
We ran half of our XenApp farm virtual (I say ran as we are moving to VDI). It ran well enough and really gave us more bang for the buck for our physical boxes. We were only able to have 25-30 users per XenApp server, which equaled a lot of wasted resources for the typical physical box. So we virtualized and ran four or five virtual XenApp servers on the same physical box that previously ran only a single instance of XenApp.
If you can already pack many users on to your Terminal Server then I wouldn't deal with virtualizing.
We ran half of our XenApp farm virtual (I say ran as we are moving to VDI). It ran well enough and really gave us more bang for the buck for our physical boxes. We were only able to have 25-30 users per XenApp server, which equaled a lot of wasted resources for the typical physical box. So we virtualized and ran four or five virtual XenApp servers on the same physical box that previously ran only a single instance of XenApp.
If you can already pack many users on to your Terminal Server then I wouldn't deal with virtualizing.
ASKER
All of this input makes me also wonder if I just add the NewServer as a Terminal Server and add a virtual machine for the accounting program if that would fly. Is there going to be licensing issues using the existing 2000 cals and ts licenses.
Ideally I'd like to add the NEWSERVER as a DC. Run Terminal Services on it and virtualize the software program used by the terminal services users on it.
Ideally I'd like to add the NEWSERVER as a DC. Run Terminal Services on it and virtualize the software program used by the terminal services users on it.
Well the problem is putting all eggs in one single bag. If that server dies, everything is dead.
When virtualizing we usually have two boxes connected to a share storage solution (iSCSI, SAN, etc) so the VMs are stored on these and powered on on any of the nodes (the hosts). If one host dies, the VMs that were running are then powered on on the remaining host. This avoids the single point of failure.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
When virtualizing we usually have two boxes connected to a share storage solution (iSCSI, SAN, etc) so the VMs are stored on these and powered on on any of the nodes (the hosts). If one host dies, the VMs that were running are then powered on on the remaining host. This avoids the single point of failure.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
You don't want to run a DC and TS on the same machine since this allows user full access to your AD environment which is a big security risk.
ASKER
If the NEWSERVER dies I will only lose the DC with Terminal Services and the software virtual machine not the one (SERVER1) with all the roles unless I am understanding the domain setup wrong.
Am I? Can I not add the NEWSERVER as a DC but not the primary DC?
Am I? Can I not add the NEWSERVER as a DC but not the primary DC?
Sure you can have as many DCs as you want.
What I would do is to keep one physical as a DC and on the new server setup a virtual machine to be another DC, a VM for the application backend and a VM for the TS.
But again, this would not remove the single point of failure. Sure if the new box dies, a DC would still be available. But how good is that if people cannot connect to the TS to run the app? :-)
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
What I would do is to keep one physical as a DC and on the new server setup a virtual machine to be another DC, a VM for the application backend and a VM for the TS.
But again, this would not remove the single point of failure. Sure if the new box dies, a DC would still be available. But how good is that if people cannot connect to the TS to run the app? :-)
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
ASKER
dariusq, thank you for the dc and ts risk comment
ASKER
This is a small company with a small budget so I am trying to look at the best solution for the amount of money they can budget.
What would you suggest to rid of us that single point of failure without spending $15,000+ on software/hardware?
I know its tough to say without knowing the exact situation but I am trying to come up with a best case solution for their budget. (which is far less than $15000 by the way :)
Thank you Claudio and others who have input
What would you suggest to rid of us that single point of failure without spending $15,000+ on software/hardware?
I know its tough to say without knowing the exact situation but I am trying to come up with a best case solution for their budget. (which is far less than $15000 by the way :)
Thank you Claudio and others who have input
Well you can get an extra server for less than $2000 guaranteed. I got mine, a Dell Poweredge T105 with 8GB RAM, RAID and two 500GB disks for less than $1000.
A decent iSCSI compatible storage solution you can get for $700 for 4TB (the Iomega StorCenter ix2-200). So for less than $1700 you can get an extra server and an iSCSI solution with 4TB.
This would allow you to setup two boxes running Hyper-V R2, both connected to a 4TB common storage. The storage itself is redundant (on the disks) so your only single point of failure would be the storage device itself. For the price I would simply buy a second one and leave it as a backup (I would buy the 1TB one at $270) so if the first one dies I would get the second one going with the drives that were on the first one.
My 2 cents!
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
A decent iSCSI compatible storage solution you can get for $700 for 4TB (the Iomega StorCenter ix2-200). So for less than $1700 you can get an extra server and an iSCSI solution with 4TB.
This would allow you to setup two boxes running Hyper-V R2, both connected to a 4TB common storage. The storage itself is redundant (on the disks) so your only single point of failure would be the storage device itself. For the price I would simply buy a second one and leave it as a backup (I would buy the 1TB one at $270) so if the first one dies I would get the second one going with the drives that were on the first one.
My 2 cents!
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
I would have to agree with Claudio you can purchase a cheap server.
Seperation of your AD services and any other services is very important. TS should not be on a DC trust me I have ran into huge problems over the years with small businesses running TS on a DC. Total rebuild of AD even MS couldn't fix the problems.
Seperation of your AD services and any other services is very important. TS should not be on a DC trust me I have ran into huge problems over the years with small businesses running TS on a DC. Total rebuild of AD even MS couldn't fix the problems.
ASKER
Server1
DC
Application (Virtual)
Server2
Remote Desktop Service
DC (virtual)
Is this what your saying? I think I'm missing your point, sorry
DC
Application (Virtual)
Server2
Remote Desktop Service
DC (virtual)
Is this what your saying? I think I'm missing your point, sorry
Server 1 (New)
DC (VM)
Application (VM)
Server 2 (New) - Assuming you will buy another box
DC (VM)
TS (VM)
Both connected to the Iomega ix2-200. This way if any of the servers die (1 or 2) the other box would be able to resume the VMs that were running on the server that died and life would go on as usual! Great redundancy.
Assuming you do NOT buy a new box:
Server 1 (One of the old boxes)
DC (running on the physical OS)
Application (VM - this will require you to install the Hyper-V Role, assuming this box runs 2008)
Server 2 (New)
TS (VM)
DC (VM)
This setup will work but as you know, is not redundant in any way. If Server 2 is down, no one can connect to the TS and therefore launch any apps. If Server 1 is down, users will be able to connect to the TS but as the app is not running, not sure what they will be able to do.
If you do not want to buy another box, simply get the storage and reuse your existing servers as nodes in a virtualization cluster, with your new one. Some virtualization solutions, from what I remember, do allow you to have different hardware, as long as they are all capable of running the virtualization platform (i.e. Hyper-V). Assuming you have two existing servers and one new one, this would give you a three server cluster with shared storage. A much better solution IMHO.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
DC (VM)
Application (VM)
Server 2 (New) - Assuming you will buy another box
DC (VM)
TS (VM)
Both connected to the Iomega ix2-200. This way if any of the servers die (1 or 2) the other box would be able to resume the VMs that were running on the server that died and life would go on as usual! Great redundancy.
Assuming you do NOT buy a new box:
Server 1 (One of the old boxes)
DC (running on the physical OS)
Application (VM - this will require you to install the Hyper-V Role, assuming this box runs 2008)
Server 2 (New)
TS (VM)
DC (VM)
This setup will work but as you know, is not redundant in any way. If Server 2 is down, no one can connect to the TS and therefore launch any apps. If Server 1 is down, users will be able to connect to the TS but as the app is not running, not sure what they will be able to do.
If you do not want to buy another box, simply get the storage and reuse your existing servers as nodes in a virtualization cluster, with your new one. Some virtualization solutions, from what I remember, do allow you to have different hardware, as long as they are all capable of running the virtualization platform (i.e. Hyper-V). Assuming you have two existing servers and one new one, this would give you a three server cluster with shared storage. A much better solution IMHO.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
ASKER
Thanks Claudio.
I hadn't thought about having more than one VM on a machine because it will cost $4500 just for Win 2008 r2 ent alone before cals, ts licenses etc...
I guess I'll put together costs and let them weight out risks versus cost.
I hadn't thought about having more than one VM on a machine because it will cost $4500 just for Win 2008 r2 ent alone before cals, ts licenses etc...
I guess I'll put together costs and let them weight out risks versus cost.
ASKER
How come in your first scenario you didn't put the Server1 DC right on the physical os?
Well Hyper-V Server is free.
http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/default.aspx
So if you use it on all three servers you get a 3-node cluster for free.
All you need is licenses for the OS running on the VMs. As two of the physical servers you would reinstall with Hyper-V Server, this means the OS licenses that were used on them you can use on the VMs. This would require two extra licenses I think to get you the 4 VMs up and running, plus TS CALs.
Am I missing something?
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/default.aspx
So if you use it on all three servers you get a 3-node cluster for free.
All you need is licenses for the OS running on the VMs. As two of the physical servers you would reinstall with Hyper-V Server, this means the OS licenses that were used on them you can use on the VMs. This would require two extra licenses I think to get you the 4 VMs up and running, plus TS CALs.
Am I missing something?
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
Alos, with Enterprise edition you get 4 virtual installs with the purchase of Enterprise.
ASKER
that comes with the $2200 price tag :)
Standard $700 1VM
Enterprise $2200 4VM's
My understanding is when you create the VM you need another license for that OS.
Let look at this scenario
Server 1 (New) Enterprise $2200 4VM's
DC (VM) Standard $700
Application (VM) Have license already
Server 2 (New) - Assuming you will buy another box Enterprise $2200 4VM's
DC (VM) Standard $700
TS (VM) Standard $700
Unless I am understanding Licensing wrong
Standard $700 1VM
Enterprise $2200 4VM's
My understanding is when you create the VM you need another license for that OS.
Let look at this scenario
Server 1 (New) Enterprise $2200 4VM's
DC (VM) Standard $700
Application (VM) Have license already
Server 2 (New) - Assuming you will buy another box Enterprise $2200 4VM's
DC (VM) Standard $700
TS (VM) Standard $700
Unless I am understanding Licensing wrong
If you run Windows Hyper-V Server that is free, all you need is to buy licenses for the OS running on the VMs.
As you would have 4 VMs in total you would need 4 OS licenses. But two I assume you already have as they were running on the existing hardware.
So all you need is two STD licenses. Nothing else.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
As you would have 4 VMs in total you would need 4 OS licenses. But two I assume you already have as they were running on the existing hardware.
So all you need is two STD licenses. Nothing else.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
Each Enterprise license gives you four installs of Windows 2008 Standard and\or Enterprise edition on 1 physical computer.
ASKER
So I can install it four times with the same key?
Yes, you can install 4 virtual machines with the same virtual key.
Still, would not be cheaper to use Hyper-V Server and simply buy two extra 2008 STD licenses than buying Enterprise to get the free 4 licenses?
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
ASKER
gonna try and figure that out. Cant use our existing machine for cluster because it doesn't meet the processor requirements of Hyper-V.
ASKER
Dariusq - can i not have the second machine host os a DC and the virtual machine on that machine run Terminal Services without the permissions issues you spoke of?
That will work without any permission issues.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
You can do it that way but again that isn't really recommended but it can be done. I have had the same configuration at one point.
I am just trying to understand the logic for not going with a true multi-node Hyper-V Server cluster with shared storage. Costwise it may be cheaper or the same in the worst case scenario.
Performance and Redundancy wise it will be much better.
Sure as your existing servers are not capable of running Hyper-V Server, buying a new server and storage are indeed required but that will set you back $1700. That plus two STD licenses is still cheaper than 2008 Enterprise.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
Performance and Redundancy wise it will be much better.
Sure as your existing servers are not capable of running Hyper-V Server, buying a new server and storage are indeed required but that will set you back $1700. That plus two STD licenses is still cheaper than 2008 Enterprise.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP
ASKER
Hi Claudio
I have been looking at the hyper v server solution with two servers but am having trouble figuring out what will go on what servers and still provide redundancy without having Enterprise on both servers. It seems to me Hyper V will enable me two have the vm's as a base but I still need the software OS's to run the DC's, TS and Application ( not worried about OS for App just the availability of a VM).
If I get two brand new servers with the iomega and run HyperV Server on them what were you thinking for configuration and OS' on each? Lets use your earlier example.
Server 1
DC
Application
Server 2
DC
TS
Both connected to the Iomega ix2-200
It seems to me that I need to be able to have 3 VM's capability on each machine to have total redundancy. So if Server 1 fails server2 can add the Terminal Services VM and Server1 fails then Server2 needs the Application VM.
Thank you both for your patience :)
I have been looking at the hyper v server solution with two servers but am having trouble figuring out what will go on what servers and still provide redundancy without having Enterprise on both servers. It seems to me Hyper V will enable me two have the vm's as a base but I still need the software OS's to run the DC's, TS and Application ( not worried about OS for App just the availability of a VM).
If I get two brand new servers with the iomega and run HyperV Server on them what were you thinking for configuration and OS' on each? Lets use your earlier example.
Server 1
DC
Application
Server 2
DC
TS
Both connected to the Iomega ix2-200
It seems to me that I need to be able to have 3 VM's capability on each machine to have total redundancy. So if Server 1 fails server2 can add the Terminal Services VM and Server1 fails then Server2 needs the Application VM.
Thank you both for your patience :)
ASKER
Sorry I said backwards.
"It seems to me that I need to be able to have 3 VM's capability on each machine to have total redundancy. So if Server 1 fails server2 can add the Application VM and Server 2 fails then Server 1 needs the Terminal Services VM"
"It seems to me that I need to be able to have 3 VM's capability on each machine to have total redundancy. So if Server 1 fails server2 can add the Application VM and Server 2 fails then Server 1 needs the Terminal Services VM"
ASKER
The way I am understanding Hyper-V Server 2008 R2. I can load it on both machines and cluster them. Then load Enterprise 2008 Server with DC. Then load VM's for TS, DC #2, and the APP pointing to my Iomega.
Am I getting closer lol
Am I getting closer lol
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Completely.
See that was not hard....2 days and 6 Tylenol later :)
Thank you very much for your patience and input.
See that was not hard....2 days and 6 Tylenol later :)
Thank you very much for your patience and input.
ASKER
Great Job Claudio and thanks to others for their input
Terminal Services is a different story. Not because it does not work properly and/or perform as expected. The bottom line is this will depend totally on how many concurrent users you will have and the applications they will run.
Just today Citrix released a document showing their tests on Terminal Servers hosted under Amazon and on their own. The total number of users vary a lot depending on the resources you allocate to the server, from 7 users to 60. You can read more about it here:
http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX120300
Also, performance will greatly differ depending on the hardware you get for your Hyper-V host. If you have very fast storage, tons of RAM and CPU muscle and you allocate accordingly to the TS, it will probably work for you. My experience is it works great for light loads. Keep in mind as well this may vary a lot depending on the apps you have.
I am still to see a Terminal Server VM beat a real physical server running TS, especially in scalabitliy and when under heavy loads (70, 90 users at the same time).
Again, this may work great for you (as it does for me) but make sure this is for lighter loads and not for tons of concurrent users. If that is the case I am pretty sure it will work great for you.
Cláudio Rodrigues
Citrix CTP