building new virtual machine.

i am building a new virtual machine using server 2008 R2. the hyper-v server has a local 1 TB raid 10 volume used to store the VHD's.

What would be a good hard drive config to use. I would like to have a c: system partition and a data  partition. d: drive. should i use 60gb fixed VHD for the system dirve and a differencign vhd for the data with no limit ?

thanks.
dirkdigsAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Mohamed KhairyConnect With a Mentor Enterprise Solutions ArchitectCommented:
It depends on the system HW recommendation settings under virtualization from the product vendor and you will find Microsoft Support Policies and Recommendations for products that will be supported under virtualization with the recommended settings:

for example : Exchange Servers in Hardware Virtualization Environments

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc794548(EXCHG.80).aspx

0
 
Dave StringfellowIT managerCommented:
It depends on the data you will have on that, but if you are happy to let it grow till its full, thats fine. There is no set way to setup VHDs you need to plan how much data you think you need, and set to that. You only have a limit to the size of your physical  hard drives in this case :)
0
 
dirkdigsAuthor Commented:
should i use 1 vhd for each partittion or just one for both. what are most people doing ?
0
Improve Your Query Performance Tuning

In this FREE six-day email course, you'll learn from Janis Griffin, Database Performance Evangelist. She'll teach 12 steps that you can use to optimize your queries as much as possible and see measurable results in your work. Get started today!

 
Dave StringfellowConnect With a Mentor IT managerCommented:
I personally use only 1 VHD with 1 volume, I don't see the point in having more than 1 Volume, that's what directory's are for ;)

It maybe safer to have 2 VHDs so if the large one fills the drive, you can move it to larger physical disks and leave the OS drive alone if you want to do it that way.
0
 
dirkdigsAuthor Commented:
i'm building a file server.
0
 
Darius GhassemConnect With a Mentor Commented:
I like having a VHD for each partition because of performance benefits when having multiple VHD files this allows write access to multiple files at once. Also, when you get large VHD files you can get low performance.

Also, depending on what type of backup solution you have if you have multiple VHD files you can restore the partition that has the corruption or missing file and not the whole system
0
 
kevinhsiehConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Yes, use a VHD file attached to the virtual IDE controller for the C drive, and then additional VHD drives for data attached to synthetic SCSI for your data partitions.  I personally always use dynamically expanding VHD files, but it's your choice.  Microsoft has improved performance of dynamic VHD in Hyper-V 2008 R2 to almost match fixed disks.  My file server uses iSCSI to connect to my SAN, so I can dynamically grow the data volumes.  If you don't have a SAN, you can't dynamically grow your disk storage (well you can hot add disk and then use dynamic disk spanning, but I DO NOT recommend ever using dynamic disks).  Your option for expanding your file server is to shut down the VM, expand the size of the data VHD, boot the VM and then use Disk Manager or diskpart.exe to expand the partition.

Since it's a file server, you can also add another SCSI VHD for storing your shadow copies.

So, for best performance, attach your data drives vie the synthetic SCSI adapter, give your VM lots of RAM, and store everything on flash drives!  ;-)
0
 
dirkdigsAuthor Commented:
@ kevinhsieh:

what is the difference with the IDE and the SCSI if my VHD files are both going to be on my RAID 10 volume any ways. Thanks. Performance improvement?
0
 
kevinhsiehCommented:
There is a performance improvement when attaching drives to the synthetic SCSI adapter because it doesn't have to go through the emulation required to present IDE to the VM, and because the SCSI specification allows greater performance when there are multiple concurrent requests.
0
 
dirkdigsAuthor Commented:
@ kevinhsieh:

are you sure about that? i was jsut using atto disk benchmark and i was getting better read/writes from my system partition. IDE.
0
 
kevinhsiehCommented:
Upon further research, it shouldn't matter too much, but SCSI is still (slightly) better for I/O intensive workloads and multiple concurrent requests.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/virtual_pc_guy/archive/2009/12/01/why-hyper-v-cannot-boot-off-of-scsi-disks-and-why-you-should-not-care.aspx

"There are two limitations that remain for IDE disks:

•Disk commands to IDE disks on the same controller are serialized by the guest operating system (note that you can only have two IDE disks on a single controller)
•The IDE disk is limited to I/O block sizes of 512kb or less – while the SCSI controller can go up to block sizes of 8mb
However I have yet to see a test where either of these limitations resulted in a noticeable performance difference between IDE and SCSI."
0
 
QlemoBatchelor, Developer and EE Topic AdvisorCommented:
This question has been classified as abandoned and is being closed as part of the Cleanup Program.  See my comment at the end of the question for more details.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.