We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

virtualize terminal server 2003

I am looking to see if people have ritualized terminal server. Is it supported? any speed issues? I am looking to use vmware.


thanks
Comment
Watch Question

IT Director
Commented:
No issues at all. I have virtualized Citrix servers, Terminal servers and had no issues with latency or performance.
What version of VMWare and what hardware are you planning on using?
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Fellow
Expert of the Year 2017
Commented:
Yes, you could use VMware Converter, to P2V the server.

Generally, you will get less concurrent users on the terminal server in our experience under any hypervisor, than if it was a physical server.
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Fellow
Expert of the Year 2017

Commented:
Windows 2003 is a supported OS, under VMware vSphere.

Author

Commented:
I was going to user the free vmware hyperviros  and try to setup 2 virtual terminal server. Will this work? Do you get better performance if you have 2 virtual terminal server or one physical terminal server? The reason why I ask is that lately a lot of my users are complaining about typing lag. They would type something and it take second to shows when they type email.

thanks
Jon BrelieSystem Architect
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Commented:
Typing lag is more likely caused by network latency on their connection.  I like to see below 60ms in my pingtimes for good RDP connections.

Creating VMs from scratch on the vmware architecture will result in much faster systems that servers that have been P2V'd
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Fellow
Expert of the Year 2017

Commented:
one physical terminal server, and in terms of Microsoft Licensing, it will cost you less.

We get 15-20 users per terminal server under a Hypervisor on a DL360G5, Quad Core Dual Processor, we get 70 concurrent users on the same hardware without the hypervisor.

You will need more vrtual servers to support your user base, depending upon how many concurrent users you require.

@Enphyniti: "Creating VMs from scratch on the vmware architecture will result in much faster systems that servers that have been P2V'd"

Why?
Jon BrelieSystem Architect
CERTIFIED EXPERT

Commented:
@hanccocka - I don't know really.  Just experience.  I suspect it has to do with drivers missing devices after a P2V.  All I know is I get at least 25% better performance out of systems born on VMware over systems converted from physical.

Author

Commented:
Hanccoka,
It looks like from your experience, we get more users on a physical terminal server rather than running virtual machine for Terminal Server. I just want to verify.

Enphyniti,
I do not think its network latency since I am getting good ping response over WAN. I also try it locally and same. I think it has to do with the server. The server looks good after reboot but tends to slow down later. I checked task manager and mem and cpu looks fine. I do not know what else I can do.


thanks again

Jon BrelieSystem Architect
CERTIFIED EXPERT

Commented:
We also set our TSs to reboot each night around 3AM.  It's made things better overall.
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Fellow
Expert of the Year 2017

Commented:
yes, thats correct, anybody that has tested physical versus virtual servers its a known fact.

The hypervisor slows performance slightly.

Its always recommended to restart terminal servers every 24 hours due to memory fragmentation and leaks.

Explore More ContentExplore courses, solutions, and other research materials related to this topic.