Virtualization

Ted Pezzullo
Ted Pezzullo used Ask the Experts™
on
We want to buy 2 new servers and load them up with processing power and ram and then migrate our current physical machines (we have 15 physical servers and 4 virtual using hyper-v) to virtual using hyper-v. I would like to know if it would be a good idea to have all our vms on one live host and then have the other offline host as a mirror image of the first host with real-time replication from the online host to the offline. We are also thinking to use the internal host server hard drives as storage instead of an external SAN. Are there any drawbacks to this? Would there be a better or more efficient way to go about this and why?
Comment
Watch Question

Do more with

Expert Office
EXPERT OFFICE® is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE®

Commented:
best to use SAN as common storage for both servers.  because if one server is down, your vm still function if both are in the same team.
Ted PezzulloVP Information Technology

Author

Commented:
but if one server is the the mirror image of the other and one server is the online one while the second is offline, wouldn't it be a matter of just turning on the offline server if the online server fails? Then basically the offline server would have all of the info of the online server. Not sure if it works this way which is where my confusion comes in. Thanks!
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
Fellow 2018
Expert of the Year 2017

Commented:
That is certainly possible, what you propose.

How much downtime do you want?

You could have pair of hosts, and use Hyper-V replica to replicate your VMs from one server to the other, for DR if a host should fail.

OR, two hosts, a SAN and a Cluster.
Should you be charging more for IT Services?

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden using our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Start calculating Now!

Ted PezzulloVP Information Technology

Author

Commented:
Is there an advantage of doing it one way over the other? What's the impact in each scenario in terms of down time?
Commented:
one is you have longer down-time + possible data loss from last replicated.  but cheaper
let say server fail, it could be 5-10 min before you get notify. then you have to spin up all VMs manually.  so safe to say is around 30 min downtime.

cluster, will cost you more but it can minimize your downtime as one fail then VMs will spin up on other host automatic.  downtime usually as long as time for OS to boot.  also you can share load between both servers.

if you have enough budget, try to bundle all on one purchase as vendor will give better discount.  ISCSI SAN will be ok.
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE Fellow)VMware and Virtualization Consultant
Fellow 2018
Expert of the Year 2017

Commented:
Hyper-V HA, 1-2 mins of downtime

Hyper-V replica, a lot longer.
Ted PezzulloVP Information Technology

Author

Commented:
Makes sense. Thank you for your help!

Do more with

Expert Office
Submit tech questions to Ask the Experts™ at any time to receive solutions, advice, and new ideas from leading industry professionals.

Start 7-Day Free Trial