asked on

HyperV - Virtualize storage drives or not?

New 2012 R2 Server just in for a client. It's purpose is to act as HyperV host for a 2012 R2 Server VM that will run SAS Analytical software (very demanding on resources - IOPS, RAM, drive space, etc.). See www.sas.com

HyperV host Server has 96 GB RAM and 7TB of Samsung Enterprise SSD storage. Using Storage Spaces.

Question:
Is there any advantage / disadvantage to virtualizing the storage drives for the SAS Server VM? Client has about 3TB of data.
Should I create virtual drives to hold the data? Or would it be better to leave the data on the HyperV host (non virtualized)?
Does it matter either way - if so, why?

ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION

Cliff Galiher

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

Sal Sorice

ASKER

Thanks Cliff.

The game plan is to use the new 2012R2 box:

1. As a HyperV host for a 2012R2 VM on which to run the SAS software
2. As a HyperV host for another 2012R2 VM as a Secondary Domain Controller (once we replace the SBS 2008 box with a new 2012R2 Primary Domain Controller).

Do you think VM storage would be the way to go under this scenario? I was a bit concerned about any performance issues or problems with virtual drives that are pretty large.

Also, do you know if using dynamically expanding disks (versus fixed size) would incur any meaningful performance hit? I've read conflicting opinions but it seems like 2012R2 has pretty much fixed that.

SOLUTION

Cliff Galiher

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

Sal Sorice

ASKER

Server is 100% Enterprise class SSDs (Dell Intel 480 GB SSDs for OS in RAID 1 and (4) 3.84 TB Samsung PM863 Enterprise drives handled by Storage Spaces for the VMs.

Think dynamic would perform well in that scenario?

Cliff Galiher

Should be fine.

Sal Sorice

ASKER

Thanks Cliff!