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

    XP: Options in virtualization setup

    IT Discussion
    virtualization high availability starwind hyper-v
    5
    21
    2.7k
    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.
    • scottalanmillerS
      scottalanmiller
      last edited by scottalanmiller

      The current setup we now have is 1 physical server for each application. Meaning we have 1 server that holds DC,AD,DHCP and 3 other servers for 3 different applications(application and database).

      Since the size of the company is not very big 40 PCs and 10+ printer devices we will do the setup from scratch. No transfers from old DC.

      Option1: A recommendation we had was to get 2 new (or used) servers and a storage with RAID configuration. All virtual machines will sit on storage and the 2 servers will be used in High Availability, meaning if one drops the other one takes over. The processing is happening between the 2 servers.

      Option 2: The other solution we are thinking is to get a used HP ProLiant G8 or G9 AND max up the CPU, ram and disk capacity. In that way, we can do a cost saving to the half. We will then create the VMs we want.

      Off course we will have a plan for VM daily backup.

      What my concern is whether option 2 it’s more prone to failure. You have 1 server holding the whole company and will be working to the max 24/7. But on the other hand, it’s a server and its job is to keep working 24/7 with its full potentials based on manufacturer’s recommendations.

      I would appreciate your feedback.

      https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/2011867-options-in-virtualization-setup

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

        Well yes, of course. It is much more prone to failure. The entire purpose of the second server in the other example is to be a high availability mirror of the first one, so it's double the cost (yes, double, that's the only way to do it) but it can failover if one dies. Everything has to be duplicated. That's the high level "exactly what you asked."

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

          Now the big question, of course, is how much does the extra protection matter? This is the hard part. We know that by doubling the cost you can get safer. But is it enough safer to justify all of the extra money? You need to look into what your cost of downtime is and what your risks are and compare that against all of that extra money that you will lose. In the US, it is very rare for a company of that size to need or be able to justify two servers like that, it just doesn't make financial sense most of the time. In Europe, it's a little more common to need the extra server, kind of a cultural trend. But you certainly don't "need" a second server, even going to just one is far better than where you are today.

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

            The obvious approach here for a two node system, should you determine that that is the way that you want to go, is to look at using Hyper-V (which is free) and @StarWind_Software for your replicated location storage (which can be free, or you can pay for support as you like) to build a solid, low cost, high performance two node high availability cluster.

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

              @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

              Off course we will have a plan for VM daily backup.

              I would recommend that you look at Veeam. They do a great job with Hyper-V.

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

                You may not have thought through how consolidating four workloads into a single server will actually improve your risk profile, but it does. This is because IT is an inverse "egg and baskets" scenario. In this case, you are reducing four points of failure to one, which improves your overall reliability. You are also moving from more fragile physical servers to virtual, which improves your risk as well. And you are moving from old gear to new, also improving risk.

                https://mangolassi.it/topic/6192/stop-talking-about-keeping-eggs-in-a-basket
                http://www.smbitjournal.com/2012/11/virtual-eggs-and-baskets/

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • matteo nunziatiM
                  matteo nunziati
                  last edited by

                  @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                  Off course we will have a plan for VM daily backup.

                  I would recommend that you look at Veeam. They do a great job with Hyper-V.

                  question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                  This is what we did. As doubling is too much and downtime is tolerable for us in the end (if downtime is limited), we pumped up an already deployed server a DL160G9, we buyed a new bigger one a DL380G9. 380 is the production server and it does the cruching , the 160 stays as "replica" and will be fired up just in case of a failure at the main server.

                  Altaro does daily backups, but veeam can be there - just a matter of personal preferences.

                  Of course the smaller server can't handle the full load, but enough ram let the DBs stay "responsive" enough and , if you plan a proper SLA for the main server, you can still keep part of the work going on during the failure.

                  Deleted74295D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • matteo nunziatiM
                    matteo nunziati
                    last edited by matteo nunziati

                    of course we already had the DL160 so we needed just an extra 7-8% over the 380 cost to build the thing, but reusing HW is a common way to create a "life insurance" while keeping costs low.

                    Think like:

                    • main server: 10k sas or ssd depending on needs, enough ram, faster CPUs
                    • secondary: SATA OBR10, same ram if possible (this saves you with dbs), slower CPUs

                    basically the bare minimum to say: you are not at a full stop in the case a non redundant component in the main will fail.

                    or... you can still buy a Vertex 😛

                    The thing here is: how much power do you need to allow for the cover of your daily costs? if you totally stop you have big losses. If the company is able to process part of its activities maybe you can cover daily costs at least...
                    while this is not simple to compute and estinate, I've used this parameter to define our "life insurance"

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ObsolesceO
                      Obsolesce
                      last edited by

                      I tend to lean towards Option2, unless the cost of downtime warrants HA. Now a-days, you can get HA for little cost if you already have the physical servers, or getting refurbished ones from Dell.

                      Even for a small SMB, you could potentially have HA for less than 10k. That includes two servers, StarWind vSAN, and the 1Gbs networking components. This can be done with Hyper-V Server and Linux, or using existing Windows Server licensing for infrastructure VMs. If you add the cost of two Server 2016 Standard licenses, that's another $3k. Otherwise, you can save that going Linux.

                      So, is an extra $5-10k worth the cost of avoiding the small chance of a physical server failure? Probably not, I stil see 2950's going strong! If you can afford 4 hours of downtime to go pick up a broken server part you don't have a spare of, then I'd go with option 2, plus good backups with Veeam.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Deleted74295D
                        Deleted74295 Banned @matteo nunziati
                        last edited by Deleted74295

                        @matteo-nunziati said

                        question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                        Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                        scottalanmillerS J 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • scottalanmillerS
                          scottalanmiller @Deleted74295
                          last edited by scottalanmiller

                          @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                          @matteo-nunziati said

                          question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                          Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                          I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                          Since I was the sole responder there (still am) and not here.

                          Deleted74295D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • J
                            Jimmy9008 @Deleted74295
                            last edited by

                            @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                            @matteo-nunziati said

                            question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                            Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                            Yep, I ready this and thought... Scott is going insane. Split personality maybe cant remember posting the question...!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Deleted74295D
                              Deleted74295 Banned @scottalanmiller
                              last edited by

                              @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                              @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                              @matteo-nunziati said

                              question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                              Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                              I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                              That's not the same thing.

                              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • scottalanmillerS
                                scottalanmiller @Deleted74295
                                last edited by

                                @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                @matteo-nunziati said

                                question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                                Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                                I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                                That's not the same thing.

                                Well, I cross posted the majority from here TO there. So the leeching is more in that direction then.

                                Deleted74295D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • Deleted74295D
                                  Deleted74295 Banned @scottalanmiller
                                  last edited by

                                  @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                  @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                  @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                  @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                  @matteo-nunziati said

                                  question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                                  Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                                  I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                                  That's not the same thing.

                                  Well, I cross posted the majority from here TO there. So the leeching is more in that direction then.

                                  So you hurt the SEO of 2 websites in one go? Good work.

                                  J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                  • J
                                    Jimmy9008 @Deleted74295
                                    last edited by

                                    @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                    @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                    @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                    @matteo-nunziati said

                                    question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                                    Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                                    I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                                    That's not the same thing.

                                    Well, I cross posted the majority from here TO there. So the leeching is more in that direction then.

                                    So you hurt the SEO of 2 websites in one go? Good work.

                                    Cheer up, its Friday!

                                    Deleted74295D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • Deleted74295D
                                      Deleted74295 Banned @Jimmy9008
                                      last edited by

                                      @Jimmy9008 said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                      @matteo-nunziati said

                                      question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                                      Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                                      I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                                      That's not the same thing.

                                      Well, I cross posted the majority from here TO there. So the leeching is more in that direction then.

                                      So you hurt the SEO of 2 websites in one go? Good work.

                                      Cheer up, its Friday!

                                      I just don't think we're being fair to the source by not back linking to them.

                                      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • scottalanmillerS
                                        scottalanmiller @Deleted74295
                                        last edited by

                                        @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @Jimmy9008 said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @Breffni-Potter said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

                                        @matteo-nunziati said

                                        question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

                                        Yeah if we're going to cross post a link to the source would be useful. It's a bit too much like leeching content otherwise.

                                        I let him know that there was more info here because he posted when there was no one online there.

                                        That's not the same thing.

                                        Well, I cross posted the majority from here TO there. So the leeching is more in that direction then.

                                        So you hurt the SEO of 2 websites in one go? Good work.

                                        Cheer up, its Friday!

                                        I just don't think we're being fair to the source by not back linking to them.

                                        Well, if when cross posting from here to there we could do that, then that's a viable discussion to have. As we can't, it's not.

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

                                          OP is going with Hyper-V, unlikely because I mentioned it I think that was already decided, and is evaluating the cost of downtime to determine the value of the deterrent.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ObsolesceO
                                            Obsolesce
                                            last edited by

                                            Oh should have I posted my reply on SW instead?

                                            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 1 / 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post