Recent Virtual Server 2005 posts*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
|
Add Solution
Latest Topics
Post Reply |
This is Spam! | Mark as Spam
ISCSI or Fibre?Source: microsoft.public.virtualserver
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: Kevin Bigland
Message:Hi,
I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our webfarm
infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently running on
Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with various
backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to move to
centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre channel
storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or DS4200.
Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so, what is
the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between the two
technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar applications).
We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs, totalling
around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a Windows 2008
failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and I'm
about to buy shares in a RAM company....
Post Reply |
This is Spam! | Mark as Spam
Related Messages
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:No experience on Fibre, but I did use iSCSI in some test scenarios while I
was writing the Server 2008 book. I found it very fast and flexible, and
didn't see a speed degradation. But honestly, my level of use wasn't pushing
it to any kind of limits. This was on Hyper-V, btw, not on VS.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"Kevin Bigland" <Kevin (email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Show quoted text
> Hi,
>
> I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our webfarm
> infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently running
> on
> Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with various
> backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
> headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
>
> Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to move
> to
> centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre
> channel
> storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or DS4200.
>
> Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so, what is
> the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between the
> two
> technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar applications).
>
> We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs, totalling
> around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a Windows
> 2008
> failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
>
> We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and I'm
> about to buy shares in a RAM company....
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: Kevin Bigland
Message:Cheers Charlie.
Were you hosting the machine's boot VHDs on the iSCSI? There seems to be
some suggestion that this isn't possible (that the virtual host must boot
from a local VHD, but can then access the iSCSI device itself, rather than
through the host server).
"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
Show quoted text
> No experience on Fibre, but I did use iSCSI in some test scenarios while I
> was writing the Server 2008 book. I found it very fast and flexible, and
> didn't see a speed degradation. But honestly, my level of use wasn't pushing
> it to any kind of limits. This was on Hyper-V, btw, not on VS.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
> "Kevin Bigland" <Kevin (email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our webfarm
> > infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently running
> > on
> > Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with various
> > backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
> > headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
> >
> > Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to move
> > to
> > centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre
> > channel
> > storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or DS4200.
> >
> > Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so, what is
> > the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between the
> > two
> > technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar applications).
> >
> > We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs, totalling
> > around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a Windows
> > 2008
> > failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
> >
> > We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and I'm
> > about to buy shares in a RAM company....
>
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:Both, if I remember correctly. I am pretty sure I had VHDs stored on the
iSCSI LUN, and appeared as a drive letter in the parent partition (host, in
VS terms). The VMs booted off them just as they would any local device
(since they're seen as local by the host, essentially.) And I did use the
iSCSI from within as well, to set up clustering.
There are some decent software iSCSI solutions that should let you test out
your concepts before you spend $$$. Starwind comes to mind, but I'm sure
there are others.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"Kevin Bigland" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Show quoted text
> Cheers Charlie.
>
> Were you hosting the machine's boot VHDs on the iSCSI? There seems to be
> some suggestion that this isn't possible (that the virtual host must boot
> from a local VHD, but can then access the iSCSI device itself, rather than
> through the host server).
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>
>> No experience on Fibre, but I did use iSCSI in some test scenarios while
>> I
>> was writing the Server 2008 book. I found it very fast and flexible, and
>> didn't see a speed degradation. But honestly, my level of use wasn't
>> pushing
>> it to any kind of limits. This was on Hyper-V, btw, not on VS.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>> "Kevin Bigland" <Kevin (email address - cut out)> wrote in
>> message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our
>> > webfarm
>> > infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently
>> > running
>> > on
>> > Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with
>> > various
>> > backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
>> > headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
>> >
>> > Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to
>> > move
>> > to
>> > centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre
>> > channel
>> > storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or DS4200.
>> >
>> > Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so, what
>> > is
>> > the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between
>> > the
>> > two
>> > technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar
>> > applications).
>> >
>> > We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs, totalling
>> > around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a Windows
>> > 2008
>> > failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
>> >
>> > We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and
>> > I'm
>> > about to buy shares in a RAM company....
>>
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: Kevin Bigland
Message:Superb, I shall get researched. All I need now is some info on Fibre Channel,
and I can get this written up.
Many thanks for your help.
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: Daveyd
Message:Just as a follow up...
I am running VS 2005 R2 on a 2 node Host cluster. The cluster is attached
to an iSCSI SAN (Dell MD3000i). I am running 5 VMs with all of the VHDs on
the SAN. The Hosts are connected to the 3000i vis a Cisco 3750 Gig Switch.
Everything is pretty fast and reliable. We went with iSCSI due to mostly
the cost factor and since our infrastructure is all Ethernet
"Kevin Bigland" wrote:
Show quoted text
> Superb, I shall get researched. All I need now is some info on Fibre Channel,
> and I can get this written up.
>
> Many thanks for your help.
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: "Dilip Naik" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:There are two different ways to boot a VHD using iSCSI
tell the HyperV parent that it is an iSCSI volume and tell the child it is
attached to the IDE controller
tell the child it is an iSCSI volume and attach it to a legacy NIC inside
the child
There are other permutations, but I am not sure they work
Details in the white paper at www.msftmvp.com
Dilip
www.msftmvp.com
"Kevin Bigland" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Show quoted text
> Cheers Charlie.
>
> Were you hosting the machine's boot VHDs on the iSCSI? There seems to be
> some suggestion that this isn't possible (that the virtual host must boot
> from a local VHD, but can then access the iSCSI device itself, rather than
> through the host server).
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>
>> No experience on Fibre, but I did use iSCSI in some test scenarios while
>> I
>> was writing the Server 2008 book. I found it very fast and flexible, and
>> didn't see a speed degradation. But honestly, my level of use wasn't
>> pushing
>> it to any kind of limits. This was on Hyper-V, btw, not on VS.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>> "Kevin Bigland" <Kevin (email address - cut out)> wrote in
>> message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our
>> > webfarm
>> > infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently
>> > running
>> > on
>> > Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with
>> > various
>> > backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
>> > headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
>> >
>> > Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to
>> > move
>> > to
>> > centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre
>> > channel
>> > storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or DS4200.
>> >
>> > Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so, what
>> > is
>> > the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between
>> > the
>> > two
>> > technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar
>> > applications).
>> >
>> > We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs, totalling
>> > around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a Windows
>> > 2008
>> > failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
>> >
>> > We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and
>> > I'm
>> > about to buy shares in a RAM company....
>>
Sent: 07/02/2008
From: "Dilip Naik" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:umm small correction
should be "boot a child" and not "boot a VHD"
"Dilip Naik" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Show quoted text
> There are two different ways to boot a VHD using iSCSI
> tell the HyperV parent that it is an iSCSI volume and tell the child it is
> attached to the IDE controller
> tell the child it is an iSCSI volume and attach it to a legacy NIC inside
> the child
>
> There are other permutations, but I am not sure they work
>
> Details in the white paper at www.msftmvp.com
>
> Dilip
> www.msftmvp.com
>
> "Kevin Bigland" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> Cheers Charlie.
>>
>> Were you hosting the machine's boot VHDs on the iSCSI? There seems to be
>> some suggestion that this isn't possible (that the virtual host must boot
>> from a local VHD, but can then access the iSCSI device itself, rather
>> than
>> through the host server).
>>
>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
>>
>>> No experience on Fibre, but I did use iSCSI in some test scenarios while
>>> I
>>> was writing the Server 2008 book. I found it very fast and flexible, and
>>> didn't see a speed degradation. But honestly, my level of use wasn't
>>> pushing
>>> it to any kind of limits. This was on Hyper-V, btw, not on VS.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charlie.
>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>>
>>> "Kevin Bigland" <Kevin (email address - cut out)> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I've been tasked with producing the project plan for upgrading our
>>> > webfarm
>>> > infrastructure to meet our future requirements. We are currently
>>> > running
>>> > on
>>> > Virtual Server 2005, running on two separate virtual servers, with
>>> > various
>>> > backup jobs to create redundant copies of all the images, which is a
>>> > headache, and takes way too long to check and maintain.
>>> >
>>> > Having spent a fair bit of time looking at the options, I'd like to
>>> > move
>>> > to
>>> > centralised storage, with the VHDs residing on either ISCSI or Fibre
>>> > channel
>>> > storage, most likely SAS in Raid10 on an IBM DS3300, DS3400, or
>>> > DS4200.
>>> >
>>> > Has anyone any experience with running VHDs on ISCSI or FC? If so,
>>> > what is
>>> > the performance like? I'm struggling to find any comparisons between
>>> > the
>>> > two
>>> > technologies in terms of speed for hosting VHDs (or similar
>>> > applications).
>>> >
>>> > We'll be looking to run SQL, Web, and mail servers, plus DCs,
>>> > totalling
>>> > around 30 servers eventually. The virtual servers will run on a
>>> > Windows
>>> > 2008
>>> > failover cluster, spread across 3 virtual servers.
>>> >
>>> > We're expecting these images to come in at around 600GB in total, and
>>> > I'm
>>> > about to buy shares in a RAM company....
>>>
>
Sent: 07/03/2008
From: Paul Adare <(email address - cut out)>
Message:On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:40:55 -0700, Dilip Naik wrote:
You might want to correct your whitepaper to reflect the real name of the
role, it is Hyper-V, not HyperV.
--
Paul Adare
http://www.identit.ca
System going down at 1:45 for disk crashing.
Show quoted text
> Details in the white paper at www.msftmvp.com
Post Reply |
This is Spam! | Mark as Spam
Other groups
|
Wiki