|
One change that probably needs to be made to the OP: While Hyper-v surely isnt in the same vein as vmware or xen as far as bare metal hypervisors go, it does not pass through the OS layer
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
Jadus posted:Regarding the Veeam chat last page, I just saw an ad that Veeam v6 supports Hyper-V. I know Hyper-V isn't too popular here, but does anyone have experience with this side of Veeam? I am backing up a 3 node hyper-v cluster with veeam, currently running 18 VMs. So far it just works. Backup window is about 3 hours nightly. Pretty happy with it so far. You can't do instant recoveries with it but oh well no worry. It runs a LOAD better than backup exec. Only thing I wish it could do: I have a couple vms that attach to iscsi storage directly. Veeam of course does not follow the iscsi path and back up that storage so we still have to keep backup exec installed and licensed for those couple machines. Other than that, its a been a great solution for this little cluster I run.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
Jadus posted:How big are your VM's, to get that 3 hour window? I've got a slightly smaller cluster than you've described so I'm thinking this might be a good solution. The problem is I've got one VM that has about 1.9TB worth between 2 VHD's that is our primary DFS folder target. No single VM gets near 2tb. I am thin provisioning the VMs so reported use size is low. That being said my shared volume is consumed about 500 gigs on the LUN at the moment. Even 1.9tb probably wont be a huge backup window unless you have tons of daily changes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Anyone else run Virtual AD instances to remote sites for clients? I am thinking about starting up cloud AD instances, my VCAP-DCA teacher really liked it a lot, just not sure how to market it. I did some work for an MSP that does this. I dont really know how to market it either to be honest. But it worked pretty nice. Our biggest implementation would be small businesses and 9 times out of 10 they would be existing customers. Basically the situation would be a business with an SBS server or real similar. Usually only 1 or 2ish onsite servers. We would spin up a virtual environment, DC, email and anything else they needed, go in and decommission all their onsite physical stuff and then open up vpns to our datacenter usually using redundant commodity internet then switch them over to monthly service billing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
The hate against Veeam has come up in this thread recently and since we are on it again I have some new hate to throw its way as well. We recently had a problem where our nightly jobs would fail with some obscure error about CTP files. I sent in a support ticket and after two days of no response I posted my error to their community forums soliciting help only to have my post denied and being told I needed to read their 'rules' or whatever which apparently state you aren't support to post support items on their forums. Anyways, long story short: It took 2 WEEKS to get the problem solved. Thats 2 WEEKS of not knowing if my backups would be usable or not during failure.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2012 13:40
|
|
|
Erwin posted:You mean CBT files (as in, it couldn't use changed block tracking)? If that's the case, the backups were usable, they just took longer. I had the same issue, and I just had to install the latest patch to fix it. It did take them quite a while to get around to telling me about the patch, though.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2012 14:59
|
|
|
adorai posted:we have names like exchmail, lar1, lar2, dc5, callmgr1, etc.. I got the idea several years ago to name our vm hosts after planets and our vms after moons orbiting those planets. I think I got the idea from here actually. I was so proud of myself. I then took it further. I started naming remote servers after stars, but not just any star, no I named the remote server based on the proximity it was to the corporate office using the proximity of stars to earth. Then after about two years of hearing staff and vendors and consultants try their best to pronounce proximacentauri or lalande or thebe or callisto or try to figure out what each server did I just threw my hands up and went back to FS1, DC1, etc.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2012 13:43
|
|
|
Jumbo frames are not always a slam dunk. A lot rides on traffic patterns and the type of hardware you have.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2012 20:34
|
|
|
A step in the right direction would be correcting the errors in the OP
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2012 20:43
|
|
|
Bhm posted:Is there a way to make an RDP-connection smoother? I'd like to have more of a "proper" desktop experience in one of them. Its entirely possible. Stick a supported video card in the server and install remotefx on the server. Then go to the hardware config of the vm in hyper-v and assign it a remotefx video adapter instead of a standard adapter.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2012 14:42
|
|
|
Well if you are calculating for human error there really isnt any SAN that is 'redundant enough'. Lets be honest here. You can work yourself to death and spend yourself into bankruptcy trying to account for 'anything that could possibly happen'. The proper way to do risk management with your gear purchases is to calculate likelihood of occurrence and impact from occurrence for potential risks then mitigate the ones that make sense. The MD3200i is a fine kit for a SMB needing an entry level SAN. The dual controllers and dual power supplies, along with a sufficient RAID level will cover most SMBs for pretty much any reasonable outtage scenario. No, its not going to failover if Joe Admin walks in and starts beating on it with a hammer but just ensure you have backups of your data in case the poo poo hits the fan and it will treat you just fine. EDIT: I would also mention that I wouldn't be too concerned at all with it not doing replication. Replication in the SMB space is wayyyyy easy to take care of. If your kit doesnt do it you can find about a bajillion software vendors who will like Veeam. Heck, Backup Exec 2012 can do a quasi-replication of VMs now. If you want to wait a bit longer, Windows Server 8 will do replication of VMs out of the box. In other words, replication isnt a make or break feature any longer, at least in the SMB space. Syano fucked around with this message at 14:47 on Jun 5, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2012 14:44
|
|
|
I bet your SANs battery backed cache held all the machines up if the outtage was only 20 seconds.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2012 16:32
|
|
|
CSParsons posted:I'm having a hard time finding what I would guess would be a product that exists. There are tons. You have basically 2 choices: You can sign up directly with the hosting provider. Most of the time these guys will be running a vcloud infrastructure and you can import your vmdk's directly to it and nail up your VPNs (not necessarily in that order) and be done with it. You will be responsible for complete management at that point. Your other choice is to sign up with an MSP who resells the hosting providers service. This will usually cost more but the MSP will usually extend their management past the cloud and in to your environment. Hit google or ask for reccomendations around here and you will get some names.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Blew off a date this weekend so I can sit my rear end down, study more, and rewriting the lovely OP I did.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
Dell server? Should have a boot cd you can use to update your firmware. Stick your service tag in the support site and you can download the latest copy if you do not have it BTW. This is one the myriad reasons you dont use supermicro unless you really know what you are getting in to
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
Speaking of remotefx. We spun up a virtual session host and installed remotefx on the hyperv node then tried to add a remotefx adapter to the session host. The video card in the hyperv node is supported but we still can't get the vm to start with the remotefx adapter. Anyone here use remotefx and have any idea?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2012 03:10
|
|
|
Walked in this morning to a 3 node hyper-v cluster with 1 node down and all VMs offline/missing. This should not happen!  Its looking like so far that whatever crashed the first hosts subsequently crashed the clustering service on the remaining 2 hosts. Won't know til I can get the first host, which is now sitting at 'configuring memory', to boot. Thank heavens a reboot of the remaining two hosts resulted in all the VMs auto starting like they are supposed to. What a pisser.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:This wouldn't have happened if you Eh... maybe. The culprit ended up being a DIMM going bad in one of the nodes. When that happened the node entered a weird state where the mscluster service deadlocked on the shared app resources and wouldn't release. This caused the other 2 nodes to freak out and crash their cluster services. Still should reasonably expect though a node majority to take over when a single node has failed and keep the app resources online.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 21:27
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:It was a joke. Sorry, my sense of humor flatlined this morning about 6am when I had already gotten my 15th call with someone saying 'HEY DID YOU KNOW MAIL IS NOT WORKING!!'
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Im sure glad someone can laugh at it. I guess I am just thankful there is a hotfix
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
Noghri_ViR posted:Is anyone running Exchange over NFS? I know it's not supported but I've seen reports of people doing it and it running quite well. I was told that if you ever need support on it you just vmotion over to an iSCSI datastore and then call up support. I am confused. I thought that requirement was put in place so people would not present storage to the OS and Exchange environment via NFS. If you just built for instance a VM with the OS and Exchange both installed on the same volume which was just a vmdk or vhd then the OS would not know nor care how the storage was presented because it would all be present as local and then the hypervisor would then of course be responsible for negotiating nfs or iscsi or whatever. Maybe I am stupid and completely misinterpreted but I thought that was the case.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2012 14:43
|
|
|
Just Xen or Citrix Xenserver? If its Citrix, they have a great set of online docs just hit their website. Your vmware knowledge will transfer well. Concepts really translate nicely between the two.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:
Sure it could happen. But does it happen frequently? Using that logic, having a clustered solution wouldnt be HA either cause we could keep following that line of thinking: a psu could catch fire and not catch anything else on fire, but then it could also catch the rack it was in on fire and it could catch the next rack on fire and it could... ad infinitum. The truth is that a dual controller/dual psu SAN in the vein of a powervault 3200i or an equallogic kit is adequate high availability for pretty much anyone who is looking in that price realm
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
The Onion posted:I'm not sure if I need to install the agent on each VM itself Yes, you do
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
three posted:It depends on what method he is utilizing. If he is using the VMware Option (or whatever they call it), it will be doing backups the same way that Veeam, PHD Virtual, vRanger, etc. do it and it does not require an agent. Ive never been able to get it to work like its 'supposed' to without installing the agent on each machine. But yeah I think the better answer is to back up the VMs themselves with Veeam or PHD virtual. We still do our application items with BackupExec due to some of its archiving functionality.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:So, what IS a decent virtualization aware backup solution? I see people complain about Veeam quite a bit, but it seems like that's all that everyone uses. If your environment is not big, Backup Exec is not that bad. Yes Symantec sucks and yes Backup Exec does sometimes crap out errors that you do not expect nor should it crap them, but overall for small environments, even virtual ones, its not that bad. Veeam is also not terrible for smaller environments. Yes again it may do some stupid stuff from time to time and their support can sometimes be stupid but it does support Hyper-V and Vmware alike so would work ok in a small mixed environment. If your environment was going to be bigger than I would say 3 hosts and you were using all vmware, I would reccomend PHD virtual. So far everyone I've talked to likes it and we demoed it and liked it a lot ourselves. Not sure if I would use DPM. I hear it works fine but if you really do have such a mixed environment then it will be hard to use DPM because DPM is all about keeping you in the Microsoft software silo.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:In Hyper-V do I want to shut down the VMs when patching the physical server? You should enter maintenance mode so yes. If its a single hyper-v host then that means shutting them down. If its a cluster then just migrate the work loads to another host. ^^Poster above me is technically correct but best practice is to go maintenance mode
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:The yes and the no of it was basically the same conversation I had with my coworkers, where we all stood around and went, uh I think you should but I think it doesn't matter but I think it's best practice but I think it's irrelevant. The really weird part is that even though the host windows installation basically jumps up into 'dom0' so to speak, theres a small chance that whatever patch you install is going to update a service on the host install and on the hypervisor and cause your machines to shutdown anyways or something. Theres no way to know really unless you comb through the update notes to see what is actually updating. The more common scenario though is the person who wrote the update flagged it to require restart, or it actually does require restart, meaning even though your host OS is riding above the hypervisor, youre still rebooting youre hypervisor. Of course the best way to solve all these problems, provided you are lucky enough to be in this position, is to install just the hyper-v hypervisor or the server core version of windows.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
It shouldn't be. Ive put my hands on more hyper-v set ups than I care to remember and I have never seen this. Are you sure its the virtual switch that's eating it? Are you doing any sort of nic teaming on the host?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 13:41
|
|
|
Crossbar posted:I need to P2V a domain controller onto a hyper-v 2012 host. Is there a way to do this with free or cheap tools? Don't do it. Just build a second virtual dc and transfer your fsmo roles. Will probably actually be faster than a p2v
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
whaam posted:I would have loved to, unfortunately we ran out of budget for the project. In the end we should have done the research but the sales engineers from our usual rock solid vendor assured us that 4x1Gb was possible over NFS which is clearly now incorrect, I think they were thinking of MPIO and iSCSI. We are scrambling to buy 10Gb gear now as there isn't any other options really, aside from maybe using iSCSI instead but netapp really runs best on NFS and I think a lot of their features don't work on iSCSI. Have you pulled any hard IO numbers from your physical environment to see if you even need 10GE? Sometimes app vendors scream about wanting this and that in a virtual environment to ensure their app gets enough horsepower and a lot of times its total overkill. I mean you very well could need it but before I broke the budget getting it I would run at least some basic perfmon
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
Misogynist posted:
Even if requisite infrastructure wasn't in play I bet you could still do it for a 3rd of that budget. Basic SMB virtualization is cheap as balls now. A Dell MD3200i fully pop'ed with 1TB disks, a pair of Cisco 2960s and 3 hosts, along with licensing should cost about 50 grand, give or take, these days. And it should be powerful enough to run any number of servers that an SMB should need. Even if your environment pushes some badass IOPs or has some sort of massive memory requirements you should be able to put together a crème de la crème environment for just around 6 figures.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Microsoft clustering within VMWare, anything I should really be aware of? If it were a simple cluster id say use route 2. I have a 2 node file sharing cluster using in guest iscsi. Everything works just peachy and there isn't any gotchas to it at all. My hosts all connect to storage via iscsi so just add a virtual machine network to one of your iscsi adapters and youre off to the races. Bad news is that my veeam backup and replication jobs are pretty much worthless for this cluster. Since this is just a simple file server though all we do is replicate the data via dfs and grab backups at another location. Long story short: It works... but there really wasn't any point to it and it makes backups and replication tougher. Just build a redundant and available infrastructure to begin with and forget clustering.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
Misogynist posted:And every other VM HEYO!! But yeah.... 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
Unless your infrastructure is balls it should really only take maybe... I dunno... 30 seconds... to restart a vm? I dunno lemme clock a cold to login screen startup real fast... Edit: Ok it took 90 seconds... always seemed faster not watching a clock. Anyways, still pretty fast. Syano fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Mar 22, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
Moey posted:Does anyone really prefer XenServer over vSphere? The licensing model is the simplest of all the big 3... but everything else is pretty much crap in my eyes. I managed a 2 host Citrix Xen cluster for about 6 months and hated it
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2013 15:45
|
|
|
synthetik posted:Any recommendations on a managed/hosted solution? We have a need to get around 50 geographically separated thin clients up and running in a super short period of time. We have two vSphere 5.1 servers that we use locally, but we don't currently have the bandwidth to support that many external clients. You could run 50 thin clients using RDP off less than the bandwidth provided by a t1. EDIT: Unless you aren't using rdp on these clients or youre doing something other than basic office stuff (word/excel/etc...) Syano fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Mar 28, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Libertarianism for networks: Admins should have a right to destroy their networks, therefore enabling management to keep the admin on staff plus hire an MSP that actually knows what they are doing, therefore propping up capitalism. Did I do that right? I dunno it sounded funny in my head
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
DagPenge posted:Was thinking about testing Microsofts Hyper-v solution, since it is way cheaper than VMware. Anyone know of anything I should be aware of? Also can you run the SQL you need for System center VMM virtual on the same cluster it is supporting? Whats your deployment scenario? Hyper-v isn't always 'way cheaper'. I mean it can be but it depends. And yes you can run your scvmm instance as a VM.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2013 14:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
Frozen-Solid posted:DELL PowerVault All day long dude. Do it and throw your sunglasses on cause youre ballin with shared storage.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2013 22:20
|
|