VM /ETC

Posts Tagged ‘VI 3.5’

My recent post Why not VirtualCenter with SQL 2005 Express? explored the possible reasons for and against small and medium businesses (SMB) using the default, free database with VirtualCenter. But what happens if your virtual infrastructure implementation grows beyond 5 hosts and 50 virtual machines (VM), or what if you are close to the SQL 2005 Express database size limit of 4 GB? When it’s time to upgrade to a licensed version of SQL 2005 you can upgrade your VirtualCenter SQL 2005 Express database instance in place.

What happens when I outgrow SQL Express for Virtual Center? is a post from the VMGuy Blog by Dave Lawrence that provides the simple instructions to perform the upgrade in place. Read dave’s entire post, but here is a cut and paste of the VMGuy’s recommended upgrade steps. Read the rest of this entry »

As of VirtualCenter 2.5 (VC) MSDE was replaced by SQL 2005 Express as the default installation database. This post explores the idea of running small and medium business (SMB) VMware virtual infrastructure (VI) environments with the free SQL 2005 Express version instead of  a fully licensed instance of SQL 2005/2000.

To start with VMware’s VI3.5 and VC2.5 Installation Guide states:

The Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express database package is installed and configured when you select Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express as your database during VirtualCenter installation or upgrade. This is shown in Installing VMware Infrastructure Management Software. No additional configuration is required.

If Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express is already installed, review the required database patches specified in Table 2-1. If you do not prepare your database correctly, the VirtualCenter installer might display error and warning messages.See www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/default.mspx.

Note: Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express is intended to be used for small deployments of up to 5 hosts and 50 virtual machines.

5 ESX hosts and 50 VMs is definitely enough support for most small business deployments. Frankly, with modern hardware pricing the 50 VM limit will be reached before ever deploying 5 ESX hosts. 16 guests on a host is a common scenario these days which, if you do the math, creates a 3 host ESX Cluster.

So why would a company that does not expect to grow it’s number of VMs beyond 50 not use SQL 2005 Express? Here’s the 2 best reasons I could think of, and then a counter argument for each. Read the rest of this entry »

Did you take the time to plan for VMware Update Manager (VUM) when designing your virtual infrastructure architecture? Planning focus is usually on VirtualCenter (VC) server’s requirements, but then, in my experience, Update Manager and it’s default local SQL 2005 Express database seem to be added on the VC server simply because the installer is prompted about VUM during the VC setup routine. This scenario can create a poor performing VUM implementation.

Recently on the VMware Performance Team’s VROOM blog, John Liang’s post titled VMware Update Manager Performance and Best Practices Paper Posted announced a new whitepaper that should be a must read for any virtual infrastructure administrator preparing to use (or already using) VUM. The .pdf is a 14 page discussion on the topics that impact VUM such as performance, networking, resource consumption, and even virus scanning.

I find a few of these recommendations interesting, and the whitepaper leaves me wondering how common using VUM for virtual machine OS patching really is. I’ve created two informal polls, so please take a second to complete them and maybe we can get a quick gauge on how VUM is commonly implemented.

[poll id="2"][poll id="3"]

The whitepaper is a quick, informative read that I strongly encourage, but the following list of best practices was copied from the whitepaper’s Conclusion section.
Read the rest of this entry »

How do you design resource pools in an ESX Cluster? There are two strategies that are the most popular in my experience. The first strategy creates resource pools based on CPU and Memory shares for host resource conflict management, and the second strategy uses reservations and limits to guarantee physical resources and ensure VM containment. This post will use a 3 ESX host example to explain both strategies. Please feel free to comment on the pros and cons of each or why you think one is better than the other.

In the example scenario three ESX hosts each have 16 GB RAM and 2 dual core 3.0 Ghz CPUs. The three hosts will all be members of the same ESX cluster. Read the rest of this entry »