@WLS-ITGuy Interesting that it shows not supported. From that KB article that screenshot mentions, the main thing is the level of support provided
"When creating a new virtual machine, choosing the guest operating system displays the level of support, if it is anything other than Supported."
https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/2015161
@WLS-ITGuy What version of vsphere are you running?
@WLS-ITGuy said in Reverse Proxy install question:
I was going to follow @JaredBusch tutorial on using Fedora for the reverse proxy and was getting things set up in vsphere to find out that Fedora is not supported. Not that it matters to me but was curious if anyone knows why?
You mean, Fedora is not listed in the options for creating the VM in vcenter?
I should note that I just got 3 new WD-19 USB-C docks to go with the same latitude models (7490). Hopefully, they will work better in my environment.
@JaredBusch said in Laptop setup - multiple monitors, etc - suggestions?:
I have a number of users with Dell Latitudes (various models) and docks. A few are the older dock model, but most are the new USB-C style. They do not seem to have any issues using everything.
They all have 1 or 2 monitors (their preference) hooked to the dock and a keyboard and mouse.
I have a single location that has HP models like this. Their docks have been problematic. Replaced one dock 3 times in a year, warranty at least.
Do they all use the same model of monitor? I am wondering if the docks don't like the HDMI on Asus 24 inch monitors that I have been buying for several years. I bought 2 Dell 24 inch that only have DP inputs, but they haven't been in service, due to the fact that they were mounted to monitor arms and then taken off the desk by someone else and put in a corner for 6 months.
@Pete-S said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
To keep the actual performance of the VMs the same but run 3-4 times as many VMs, you would also need the same increase in storage and in network performance. That is quite possible if you are also moving from spinning disks to ssd and perhaps from 1GbE to 10GbE on the hypervisors. You also need 3-4 times as much RAM of course.
Depending on what you are upgrading I'd say the conservative number is you will get twice the capacity and the optimistic number is that you have four times the capacity.
Thanks. The majority of workloads will be moved to SSD, with the file servers running on spinning disks. I already have 2 10Gig for VMs and 2 for vmotion, per server. That is a good point about the RAM. Current RAM utilization is a bit constrained. Each server only has 128GB. I am looking at 320 GB. This will allow for some growth and also running all VMs on a single host if necessary.
Well, so far, I have had mixed results with USB-C and Thunderbolt Docks from Dell. Mostly the WD-15. I have had some issues with external monitors losing signal and basically going back and forth every second. Also, some issues with getting a power warning when booting, despite having the properly sized adapter.
Another thing to consider is the type of display ports and if the dock can support the desired resolution and refresh rates.
@IRJ said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
@wrx7m said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
@scottalanmiller So, If my average CPU usage on one of the hosts is over 50% and max is 95% for the past 6 months, I can't use that to say how much more CPU I need if I wanted to double the number of running VMs with similar performance needs?
How can you define similar, though?
Whatever my average CPU utilization is for my existing VMs on my existing hosts with 2 x Intel Xeon E5-2609 v1 CPUs.
@NetworkNerd said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
Do you have any issues with high CPU ready times today?
Here is the CPU Ready chart (previous month) at the host level for the first host . It has 9 active VMs.
Here is the CPU Ready chart (previous month) at the host level for the second host. It has 17 active VMs.
The differential between the two, in terms of number of VMs, is due to the current storage constraints. One of the VMs on the first host has significantly greater storage usage than all others. This has grown over time and forced the uneven allocation of VMs and has compounded over time.
@scottalanmiller said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
Is there a reason to expect the company to be adding so many more computationally heavy workloads?
I don't know that we would be doubling it, I was just using that as an example on how I can associate some numbers to this planning process. If someone says, we are spending $25K per server, how much more capability/capacity do we get from our investment? For RAM and storage, that is easy- Faster and greater RAM and storage capacity, adding tiered storage by introducing SSDs in RAID5 and using NLSAS in RAID1 for "bulk" storage.
Apparently, due to the complexity and advancements in CPU tech, there isn't an easy way to calculate or express a tangible value for it.
@scottalanmiller said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
What kind of processing are you doing that is eating up so much CPU today?
I have several Windows Server systems using different DB technologies, like my ERP (not even sure what the DB is) and MS SQL (WSUS, PRTG, PDQ, Veeam BR, Veeam One, etc). FileMaker (more RAM intensive) and MySQL (Fishbowl Inventory). I have a 2008 R2 RDS server, that is being migrated to Server 2016. Based on my experience with the current environment, Server 2016 uses more CPU than previous versions- Especially during Windows updates. I also have 3 Windows file and print servers, but they are more disk than CPU.
On one host, the most CPU intensive are a Ruckus wireless controller and PRTG monitoring server. - Currently, showing as 31% and 36% CPU utilization, respectively.
On the other, the most CPU intensive are PDQ Inventory/Deploy, Veeam BR and Veeam One and the current RDS server. Currently showing as 30%, 33% and 11% CPU utilization, respectively.
@scottalanmiller said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
@wrx7m said in Comparing Server CPU Capabilities?:
@scottalanmiller So, If my average CPU usage on one of the hosts is over 50% and max is 95% for the past 6 months, I can't use that to say how much more CPU I need if I wanted to double the number of running VMs with similar performance needs?
That's a bit different. You can estimate the amount of "additional capacity" available. The question becomes... can you put a value number on that additional capacity?
That was also my question. If I could (and knew what it was), I would be able to more than take a shot in the dark for choosing the new CPU. Currently, I stopped at 16 cores for Windows licensing and CPU/hardware cost. I only chose 1 CPU per server, due to the performance overhead that you and others have talked about when using more than 1 CPU with other specs being the same.
@scottalanmiller So, If my average CPU usage on one of the hosts is over 50% and max is 95% for the past 6 months, I can't use that to say how much more CPU I need if I wanted to double the number of running VMs with similar performance needs?
As I explained in another thread, I am trying to build out 2 new ESXi hosts. I currently have 2 R720XD servers, each with 2 - Intel Xeon E5-2609 2.4 GHz (v1) 4-core. I am looking at replacing them with 2- R740XD servers, each with a single Intel Xeon Gold 6242 2.8GHz (Turbo 3.9) 16-core.
This is the only benchmark I could find. The 6242 only has 1 benchmark test sample, so it is hard to say how much weight it holds.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-Gold-6242-vs-Intel-Xeon-E5-2609/3516vs1429
My question is, when using my existing servers' performance history, how can I use that to see how much of a benefit, the new CPU would provide?
I have had the same questions. Will check out Nodegroups, as @black3dynamite suggested.
@JasGot said in Windows 10 - Application Incorrectly Requiring Admin Creds to Run:
@wrx7m said in Windows 10 - Application Incorrectly Requiring Admin Creds to Run:
I just tried modifying UAC again to never notify. When I go into UAC as my admin account, it is set to never notify. If I go into UAC as the user, it shows as the one just below the top. How does that make sense?
No. It should be system wide. If you set it to never ad admin, it should be never for everyone. Is it on a domain? Is there a GPO stepping on you when logged in as a user?
I don't have it set in the GPO. I went in and checked it twice. Rebooted in between adjustments.
@mroth911 said in Custom PC Build:
I think 1000
Depending on the video cards, that might be an issue.
@mroth911 said in Custom PC Build:
I have a client of mine that wants to build a custom PC. I have been out of the custom build PC's for sometime now. However I don't know what to do for him. He needs to be able to run 6 HD monitors. He wants speed. his current setup is an AMD Black with 32gb of ram. And 3 gpu's He has a 512 ssd drive however the computer is lagging under the load of the GPU's. So he wants to upgrade everything. He streams all his HD Camera's and he as them all web based browsers. He opens up multiple windows at a time. So he can be logged into the Camera who knows how ever many times on different monitors. and he also does his own personal stuff like Facebook and skype etc. What do you guys suggest.
How big is his PSU? I wonder if that is causing issues.
Can you use the netuser command via bat file, deployed using group policy startup script?
I just tried modifying UAC again to never notify. When I go into UAC as my admin account, it is set to never notify. If I go into UAC as the user, it shows as the one just below the top. How does that make sense?