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!
Hyper-V with 1 Virtual Machine
I'm setting up a SQL Server. The hosting company recommended to use Hyper V for easier maintenance. So now we have 1 host machine with 1 guest. The guest will be running SQL and it will be the only VM on the host. In the past, without using Hyper V, we had 2 drive partitions, C with the OS and D with SQL and all the DATA. Now since we are using Hyper V, is there any point to have 2 partitions on the guest system or is installing everything on the one C partition now OK?
Just to add, the host has 2 partitions. C or the OS and D where the Virtual Machine is.
Just to add, the host has 2 partitions. C or the OS and D where the Virtual Machine is.
Do more with
EXPERT OFFICE® is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE®
WHY did you use a physical drive and not a vhd(x) The same rules apply for virtual machines as they do for physical machines.
Host is RAID 10. Guest is VHD(X) with 1 partition C right now, but I'm thinking maybe I should shrink C, create and mount virtual D for the data.
Do not use OS partitions, create two virtual disks, e.g. two VHDs, C: and D:
it will be much easier in the future, to increase the size of disk and manipulate the disks, compared to partitions!
OS Partitions are old school, when we could only create 32MB partiitons on disks!
it will be much easier in the future, to increase the size of disk and manipulate the disks, compared to partitions!
OS Partitions are old school, when we could only create 32MB partiitons on disks!
Sorry you confused me with the c: being host os and D: being virtual machine. The more spindles you can have i.e. 1 for OS , 1 for database, 1 for log files, 1 for temp files the better. I have no idea of what your storage is and what your IOPS are. Note I said spindles and not volumes and there is a huge difference. so it depends upon the actual # of physical drives and not the # of logical drives.
Yeah, I meant VHDs. Sorry for the confusion.
So to confirm, the guest has now just a C VHD. You are saying that I should create a D VHD and mount it to the host, and put SQL on D, while keeping only the OS on C. Correct?
So to confirm, the guest has now just a C VHD. You are saying that I should create a D VHD and mount it to the host, and put SQL on D, while keeping only the OS on C. Correct?
Let me add screenshots.
The server is running RAID 10. 2 partitions on Host C and D. C has OS. D has the Virtual Machine.
I created 1 VHDX for the Guest Virtual Machine and Installed Windows on it.
So basically my question is should the guest virtual machine have SQL installed on the C VHDX or should I create a D for SQL only?
Host.png
The server is running RAID 10. 2 partitions on Host C and D. C has OS. D has the Virtual Machine.
I created 1 VHDX for the Guest Virtual Machine and Installed Windows on it.
So basically my question is should the guest virtual machine have SQL installed on the C VHDX or should I create a D for SQL only?
Host.png
I actually would suggest d: for data / e: for log and f: for temp but if they ALL go to the same physical drives then the separation is only something for convenience .. if it is all just presented as 1 physical drive then it really doesn't matter. The benefit is when we are talking about different physical drives as each drive has its own data transfer limitations.
I have an EE Article: Some Hyper-V Hardware and Software Best Practices.
It addresses your questions and more.
It addresses your questions and more.
Premium Content
You need an Expert Office subscription to comment.Start Free Trial