Virtualize Exchange 2013 or not on single node?

We are currently running Exchange 2007 and have just purchased Exchange 2013 and new hardware to install it on.  We plan to upgrade directly from 2007 to 2013.

The server has two physical drives mirrored for the OS.  The other necessary storage volumes will be mapped up to our Compellent SAN which replicates these volumes to another location.

I am wondering if I am better off installing Exchange 2013 on a virtual machine that sits on a SAN volume, rather than installing it locally and having the database sit on the SAN volume.  This way I can replicate the entire virtual server to another location.  Seems like the best option, but looking for opinions as this is new to me.

The server itself will have Server Standard 2012 installed and would be using Hyper-V.
Who is Participating?
Nick RhodeConnect With a Mentor IT DirectorCommented:
I would have both directories on the SAN for replication.  Typically when I install exchange I have 2 partitions or in VMware (2 virtual disks).  I install exchange on the primary partition (C:) and then move the database and log files to the 2nd drive.  This way the OS is stable for when the logs fill up the database only dismounts and the OS doesn't crash etc.
AmitIT ArchitectCommented:
It depends upon your requirement. There are no hard and fast rules.
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2)VMware and Virtualization ConsultantCommented:
Yes, Virtual Machines give you far more benefits than physical machines.

e.g. Disaster Recovery and backup is one of them.
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.