ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?

    IT Discussion
    4
    16
    1.6k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • DashrenderD
      Dashrender
      last edited by

      So I have a couple of questions - You're getting rid of Windows Licensing, but not Windows in general? Why use Hyper-V instead of XenServer? Is it because you're using Veeam?

      Why a server instead of a NAS?

      NashBrydgesN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DashrenderD
        Dashrender @NashBrydges
        last edited by

        @NashBrydges said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

        @scottalanmiller Thanks for this. So is it fair to say you'd also recommend formatting the data partition accordingly (ie: NTFS vs. Ext4)?

        Am I correct in my understanding, from the hypervisor perspective, the VM storage partition will be NTFS, but the VM will be formatted something Linux friendly?

        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller @Dashrender
          last edited by

          @Dashrender said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

          @NashBrydges said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

          @scottalanmiller Thanks for this. So is it fair to say you'd also recommend formatting the data partition accordingly (ie: NTFS vs. Ext4)?

          Am I correct in my understanding, from the hypervisor perspective, the VM storage partition will be NTFS, but the VM will be formatted something Linux friendly?

          Hyper-V uses ReFS or NTFS, if that is what you are asking.

          DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            And the filesystem of the hypervisor has no relationship to the filesystems of the VMs. VMware uses VMFS, but the VMs are unaffected.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DashrenderD
              Dashrender @scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              @scottalanmiller said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

              @Dashrender said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

              @NashBrydges said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

              @scottalanmiller Thanks for this. So is it fair to say you'd also recommend formatting the data partition accordingly (ie: NTFS vs. Ext4)?

              Am I correct in my understanding, from the hypervisor perspective, the VM storage partition will be NTFS, but the VM will be formatted something Linux friendly?

              Hyper-V uses ReFS or NTFS, if that is what you are asking.

              yes, it is. So depending on how @NashBrydges looks at it, he'll see one filesystem or another. 😉

              NashBrydgesN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • NashBrydgesN
                NashBrydges @Dashrender
                last edited by

                @Dashrender said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                So I have a couple of questions - You're getting rid of Windows Licensing, but not Windows in general? Why use Hyper-V instead of XenServer? Is it because you're using Veeam?

                Why a server instead of a NAS?

                They're a Windows shop. They use Windows on their desktops and that's not going away. They already have Veeam so didn't make sense to move them away from something they already knew well and worked well. They already have 2 Synology NAS. One is used for local backup which is then copied over to a remote NAS at the owner's home. They also already have the R510 which is a perfect solution for their large storage needs and also supports a few other VMs.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • NashBrydgesN
                  NashBrydges @Dashrender
                  last edited by

                  @Dashrender said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                  @scottalanmiller said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                  @Dashrender said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                  @NashBrydges said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                  @scottalanmiller Thanks for this. So is it fair to say you'd also recommend formatting the data partition accordingly (ie: NTFS vs. Ext4)?

                  Am I correct in my understanding, from the hypervisor perspective, the VM storage partition will be NTFS, but the VM will be formatted something Linux friendly?

                  Hyper-V uses ReFS or NTFS, if that is what you are asking.

                  yes, it is. So depending on how @NashBrydges looks at it, he'll see one filesystem or another. 😉

                  Correct. Accessing the Hyper-V host I'll see the native file system. And the VM performs the file server function is what the users will be presented with 🙂

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • wirestyle22W
                    wirestyle22
                    last edited by wirestyle22

                    So does the host file system (NTFS) not manage the partition the VM file system is on (XFS)? Is that why @scottalanmiller is saying to separate the two? i'm a little confused how the two interact or if they interact directly/indirectly.

                    NashBrydgesN scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • NashBrydgesN
                      NashBrydges @wirestyle22
                      last edited by

                      @wirestyle22 said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                      So does the host file system (NTFS) not manage the partition the VM file system is on (XFS)? Is that why @scottalanmiller is saying to separate the two? i'm a little confused how the two interact or if they interact directly/indirectly.

                      From what Scott is suggesting, I would create 2 VHDX. One where I'll install Linux. The other to actually hold the data. This second VHDX will be mounted to the Linux VM from within the VM and formatted from within the VM. The host will create the VHDX container and the VM will format the container and mount the container for presentation to the users. Because the 2 VHDXs have different functions (one is to run the vistual machine OS and the other just to hold data), keeping them separate appears to present some advantages for their individual intended purpose.

                      The host will simply set aside the "data blocks" and the VM OS will format them.

                      wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                      • wirestyle22W
                        wirestyle22 @NashBrydges
                        last edited by

                        @NashBrydges said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                        @wirestyle22 said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                        So does the host file system (NTFS) not manage the partition the VM file system is on (XFS)? Is that why @scottalanmiller is saying to separate the two? i'm a little confused how the two interact or if they interact directly/indirectly.

                        From what Scott is suggesting, I would create 2 VHDX. One where I'll install Linux. The other to actually hold the data. This second VHDX will be mounted to the Linux VM from within the VM and formatted from within the VM. The host will create the VHDX container and the VM will format the container and mount the container for presentation to the users. Because the 2 VHDXs have different functions (one is to run the vistual machine OS and the other just to hold data), keeping them separate appears to present some advantages for their individual intended purpose.

                        The host will simply set aside the "data blocks" and the VM OS will format them.

                        Thanks

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • scottalanmillerS
                          scottalanmiller @wirestyle22
                          last edited by

                          @wirestyle22 said in Large Linux Samba Server On Hyper-V 2012 R2 - Caveats? Best Practices?:

                          So does the host file system (NTFS) not manage the partition the VM file system is on (XFS)? Is that why @scottalanmiller is saying to separate the two? i'm a little confused how the two interact or if they interact directly/indirectly.

                          The VM's storage is just files. Literally each individual file system in the VM is a file on NTFS or ReFS. So from Hyper-V we see a series of files. To the VM they are normal disks.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                          • 1 / 1
                          • First post
                            Last post