Only need the hypervisor?
Posted on 2012-09-10
I want to user Server 2012 especially because of it's replication ability. So I plan to use two physical machines with server 2012 on them. One to run the actual working VMs and one to replicate the VMs and store them offsite in case of some disaster. It is great because I don;t have to buy two licenses of server 2012 since one license can be installed twice.
However, the ONLY thing I want to install on the physical machines is Server 2012 with the Hyper-v role. Seems like a waste since there are all the other great features that i won;t use. I'd love to use them but unless the installation is virtualized and replicated, disaster recovery is much harder.
Recently i cam across Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2012. It seems like this is a free product that will install only what i want on the servers. Am I understanding this correctly?
I assume that I will have to manage the Hyper-v roles, etc... though another computer, but this seems to be exactly what i want. I'm also imagining that I would then be free to use the full features of server 2012 in VM installations to help run things for the business instead of having those installations waste the Server 2012 installation with only using one role.
can you confirm if I am seeing this correctly?