|
GanjamonII posted:Going back to my situation I had a couple of questions for y'all smart people in here 1) I'm not sure what forums that is, but regardless higher CPU ready is more time the VM has to wait to process instructions it hurts performance. 2) You're using 20 physical cores Hyperthreading is not a cpu core, at a high level it work like this. Hyperthreading is not a core replacement, it only helps how the data is processed the the core. Don't think of it as ratios, think about assigning what the virtual machines need. If it isn't saturating the vCPU(s) it has don't assign more it doesn't make it faster.
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
DevNull posted:So VMware is a service provider now.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
DevNull posted:So VMware is a service provider now. I'm trying to figure out the pricing here: http://vcloud.vmware.com/about_services/pricing Are those unit prices overages? Or are they the cost. It says that 2TB storage is the minimum purchase, but at $0.17/GB/hr that would make 2tb of storage $252,960 /month which is obviously not right. Having just put our first new vMware cluster in place, we were also looking to supplement our prod environment with a cloud test environment and the ability to seamlessly integrate this in with our current cluster is appealing, but I can't even figure out where things start on pricing here.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:Known bug if you're on 5.1 with no patches. See http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2037408 Hmm I am not using windows authentication but it is unpatched so maybe I will try patching and cross my fingers.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
People assigning the wrong vCPU amounts for the job drive me up a wall. I work for an MSP and a ton of our environments are set to 8 vCPU on all the VMs. Slowly getting around to changing them.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:People assigning the wrong vCPU amounts for the job drive me up a wall. I work for an MSP and a ton of our environments are set to 8 vCPU on all the VMs. Slowly getting around to changing them. Ugh. My old boss was so bad with this. Why does my domain controller need 4 cores?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:People assigning the wrong vCPU amounts for the job drive me up a wall. I work for an MSP and a ton of our environments are set to 8 vCPU on all the VMs. Slowly getting around to changing them. I would pay good money for a training video that would walk low level admins and application people through the basics of VM sizing and how its not like what you did for physical machines. I'd use it every day.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
parid posted:I would pay good money for a training video that would walk low level admins and application people through the basics of VM sizing and how its not like what you did for physical machines. I'd use it every day. Does anyone have some good resources for this? I would really like to read more about how to size VMs properly.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
This book really does a good job of breaking it down plain and simple. http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/critical-vmware-mistakes-you-should-avoid-larry-loucks/1102498676?ean=9781937061982
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
So here are some performance graphs for my two VM servers:  This is bad, right? Like terribly colossally bad? By my guess we've got about 200 IOPS to go around and all told, and one of the disks has 300 IOPS of demand (the graph is updated every 20 s
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
Yeah that's pretty bad looking storage performance.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
More is better! THREE THOUSAND MILLISECONDS!!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
I'm thinking that more than anything it's the latency that's killing me, right. This stuff all lives in the same rack connected by a single cheap unmanaged switch, I should be hoping for something around 10ms, right?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:I'm thinking that more than anything it's the latency that's killing me, right. This stuff all lives in the same rack connected by a single cheap unmanaged switch, I should be hoping for something around 10ms, right? Obviously lower is better. 10-15 is good, maybe on a pretty bad day 20-25ms.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
teh z0rg posted:This might be a dumb question but is there anything specific I need to do to let an NMS query VCenter Server? anything related to VCenter hardening? A bit late, but if you are on 5.1 and using AD authentication against the API you need to set it to the highest priority provider in SSO. The VI client will still work fine but the API behaves differently.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:I'm thinking that more than anything it's the latency that's killing me, right. This stuff all lives in the same rack connected by a single cheap unmanaged switch, I should be hoping for something around 10ms, right?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 06:11
|
|
|
https://my.vmware.com/group/vmware/info?slug=datacenter_cloud_infrastructure/vmware_vcloud_suite/5_1 Patch for the Login issue 5.1 U1 caused is now out
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
With ESXi5 and up, what's the guidance on the use of PVSCSI vs LSI SAS? Our workload is mostly low IOPS, a few medium IOPS machines, and one db server that can get pretty high but spends most of it's time idle.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 14:17
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:With ESXi5 and up, what's the guidance on the use of PVSCSI vs LSI SAS? Our workload is mostly low IOPS, a few medium IOPS machines, and one db server that can get pretty high but spends most of it's time idle. Only time you'll start to notice a real benefit with the PVSCSI adapter is better for machines that are pushing >1000 iops.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Only time you'll start to notice a real benefit with the PVSCSI adapter is better for machines that are pushing >1000 iops. But running pvscsi on <1000 iops won't cause a performance drop right? That's the impression I'm getting from the vmware kb.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:But running pvscsi on <1000 iops won't cause a performance drop right? That's the impression I'm getting from the vmware kb. Not it won't hurt you just won't see much, if any, gains.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
I don't suppose there's any cheap/free solutions for VDI on vmware? I've got literally just a couple of users I'd like to do it with, so I'm not going to get approval for a View license just for them.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
How cheap are you talking? Freely you can just make win7 VM's, assign static IP's, and run this optimization tool, and save static RDP shortcuts on the users desktops. Other than that VMware View Enterprise with 10 users is like 1800 MSRP
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Win7 VMs still take Microsoft licensing, hopefully he has that.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
And now I play the waiting game to see if I can get my licensing that has been hosed up for the last two years fixed before 4.1 support gets dropped.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:How cheap are you talking? Why bother with static? For some reason at my new job no one trusts dns. It makes me furious.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Yeah clearly DNS is bullshit, it's not a cornerstone technology without which the internet as we know it couldn't exist or anything  How do you not "trust" DNS? Did they used to have a useless admin who never updated records?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
Moey posted:Why bother with static? I just put static down but Dynamic would work just fine as well.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Moey posted:Why bother with static? They probably mistrust DNS because they've never worked with an environment that was configured properly. Help them to redirect their anger away from DNS and towards the idiots who ignore best-practice.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Yeah that's pretty much it, same thing for people who don't trust the network or the SAN.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:I'm trying to figure out the pricing here: Just checking back in on this subject. I was also very confused about the listed prices as they didn't make sense. You might want to go back and check that page again. The storage is now listed as $0.14-$0.17/GB-month instead of GB/hr. I'm still trying to get our account rep to give us the straight pitch and break down for all of it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
Ugh how confusing. It should probably be priced based on consumption over time. I am just now more confused why it would say per month, unless it's becoming a flat rate, not consumption/throughput. For instance if priced at so many cents per gigabyte on a storage resource, that would basically mean you can do so many writes per cent, not really just how much you can store. The update makes me think that perhaps storage is not metered, except for space use.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
After at 45 minute pitch, and rehash of the materials they have already published on their site, they finally explained it. They are setting "blocks" of resources. They bill the block monthly and you decide how you want to use it. I'm pretty sure it's a straight up resource pool. You pay whether you use the whole resource pool or not. The prices listed on the public page are an example of what these blocks could break down into if you divided it among some simulated number of VMs. There is a ~$1,300 minimum purchase which includes one "unit" of each resource (compute,storage,throughput,public IPs,ect). Support costs are bundled in compute. I'm not sure which marketing genius came up with their public pricing page but it bares no resemblance to their actual pricing structure and only serves to confuse the situation.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2013 16:05
|
|
|
Does anyone use vCenter Server Heartbeat? Gotta do budgeting for next year and after killing all of our XenServer licensing and switching back to vSphere for our server workloads, I would like some added redundancy between sites for vCenter.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
Moey posted:Does anyone use vCenter Server Heartbeat? Is HA not good enough? vCenter heartbeat is cool and all but also comes at a high price.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Is HA not good enough? vCenter heartbeat is cool and all but also comes at a high price. Should be unless one of my sites fails. 5k isn't terrible though and we have two vCenter licenses already for some reason...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Moey posted:Should be unless one of my sites fails. 5k isn't terrible though and we have two vCenter licenses already for some reason... If you have two licenses couldn't you just roll with SRM? I mean, Heartbeat is cool and all however I believe SRM would provide greater benefit overall unless you already have something in place for it. As of View 5 you can protect some of your view environment with SRM as well Dilbert As FUCK fucked around with this message at 21:31 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:19
|
|
|
I'd say give Heartbeat's documentation a whirl and see if the configuration part of it makes sense to you. If you're comfortable, with the setup, it'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:If you have two licenses couldn't you just roll with SRM? I mean, Heartbeat is cool and all however I believe SRM would provide greater benefit overall unless you already have something in place for it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Misogynist posted:SRM is a complete waste of money if you already have your storage/data networks stretched to your DR site Hence the "unless you have something in place for it"
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:36
|
|