Windows Server 2012 & 2012 R2 Virtualisation Licensing Scenarios

I am not answering any more questions on this post – to be honest, there have been too many for me to have the time to deal with them. Don’t bother asking – I’ll ignore/delete it.  My recommendations are:

  1. Re-read this post if you do not understand it after the first or second reads. To be honest, most of the questions have been from people who are just trying to make things complicated. Just license the hosts for the maximum number of Windows Server VMs that can ever run on that host, even for 1 second. It is that simple!
  2. Ask your LAR/distributor/reseller – that’s their job and that’s why you pay them

This post follows my dissertation on Windows Server 2012 licensing, which is essential reading before proceeding with this post.

[Edit] The below is unchanged with WS2012 R2. The only difference is that WS2012 R2 Datacenter edition (only) includes Automatic Virtual Machine Activation.

I’m putting Hyper-V aside for just a few minutes to talk about how you will license virtualisation of Windows Server 2012 in virtual machines no matter what virtualisation you use, be it vSphere, Hyper-V, XenServer, or whatever tickles your fancy.  BTW, the counting here also applies to:

  • System Center 2012
  • Core Infrastructure Suite (CIS)
  • Enrolment for Core Infrastructure (ECI – minimum of 25 hosts)

Please read this post s-l-o-w-l-y and let it sink in.  Then read it again.  If you have been eating bowls full of VMware FUD then read it a third time – slowly.

FAQ

  • VOSE or virtual operating system environment is a licensing term for virtual machine (VM).  It is used when talking about licensing a VM for Windows Server.
  • When you buy a license for virtualisation you legally buy and assign it to hardware, not to VMs.  The virtualisation rights of Windows Server licenses the VMs on the licensed host for Windows Server.
  • There is no mobility with OEM.
  • You can move a volume license and it’s virtualisation rights once every 90 days.  If you want to use HA (clustering), Live Migration/vMotion, DRS/Dynamic Optimization/PRO, then you need sufficient virtualisation rights on each host to support the maximum number of VMs that is possible on that host, even for 1 second.
  • You cannot split a license or it’s virtualisation rights across hosts.
  • Virtualisation rights are 2 VOSEs for a host licensed by Windows Server 2012 Standard and unlimited VOSEs for a host licensed for Windows Server 2012 Datacenter.
  • Virtualisation rights covers the host for the assigned edition of Windows Server 2012 and lower versions/editions of Windows Server.  It does not include Windows 8/7/Vista.
  • You can assign more than 1 license to a host

In other words, you license a host for the maximum number of Windows Server VMs that it could host.

1 Host, 1 CPU, 2 VMs

image

Here you want to run a single host that has 1 CPU.  The host will run 2 Windows Server virtual machines.  You will assign a single Windows Server 2012 license to this host.  The license covers 2 CPUs (there is only 1) and provides virtualisation rights for 2 virtual operating system environments (VOSEs).  In other words, you get rights to install Windows Server 2012 Standard (or previous versions) in 2 VMs on this host.

1 Host, 2 CPUs, 4 VMs

image

The Standard edition covers 2 VOSEs, but the customer wants 4 VMs running Windows Server Standard 2008 R2.  A single copy of WS2012 Standard will not suffice.  2 copies are bought to provide the 4 (2 * 2 VOSEs) VMs with licensing.

1 Host, 2 CPUs, 10 VMs

image

There are two options; do you go with the Standard or Datacenter editions of Windows Server 2012?

The Standard edition covers 2 VOSEs, but the customer wants 10 VMs running Windows Server Standard 2008 R2. A single copy of WS2012 Standard will not suffice. 5 copies are bought to provide the 10 (5 * 2 VOSEs) VMs with licensing.  Based on USA Open NL pricing the licensing of these VMs will cost $882 * 5 = $4,410.

The Datacenter edition of WS2012 gives unlimited VOSEs and covers 2 CPUs in the host.  This solution will require a single Windows Server 2012 Datacenter license which will cost $4,809.

Decision: If you will not go over 10 VMs on this host then Windows Server 2012 Standard edition is the way to go.  If you estimate that there is a good chance of the VM numbers growing then spend an extra $399 and pick up the easier to account-for Windows Server 2012 Datacenter with it’s unlimited VOSE rights.

10 is the magic number using USA Open NL pricing. Once you reach 10 VOSEs on a 1 or 2 CPU host, you need to consider the Datacenter edition because it is cheaper once you hit 11 VOSEs.

1 Host, 4 CPUs, 4 VMs

image

It’s an unusual configuration but a valid one for the demonstration.  The WS2012 Standard/Datacenter SKUs cover 2 CPUs each.  In this case there are 4 CPUs.  This will require 2 copies of Windows Server 2012 Standard, which also covers the 4 VMs.

Let’s pretend that 300 VMs will run on this host with 4 physical CPUs.  Then we would assign 2 copies of Windows Server Datacenter on it.  2 copies will cover 2 CPUs each (4 CPUs) and unlimited VOSEs.

That Host with 320 Logical Processors – 10 CPUs with 16 Cores with Hyperthreading

image

The maximum specification for Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V is 320 logical processors in the host.  That could be 10 Intel CPUs, each with 16 cores, with Hyperthreading enabled.  We don’t count cores or logical processors when we license.  We count CPUs, sockets, or plain old processors – pick the term you prefer.  There are 10 CPUs/sockets/processors in this server.  That requires 5 copies of either Windows Server 2012 Standard or Datacenter, depending on the required number of VOSEs.

Clusters

Let’s move on to the clusters, where people usually get things wrong because they don’t understand (or don’t want to understand) the mobility rights.  VOSEs licensed by OEM cannot move.  VOSEs licensed by VL can move once every 90 days.  The correct solution is to license each host for the maximum number of VOSEs that it can have for even one second.  And when I say “correct” I mean legal.  Software Asset Management professionals (auditors) are not stupid and the “tricks” I hear people proposing are neither original or unknown to these auditors.

Reminder: This applies even to you non-Hyper-V folks.

2 Hosts, 1 CPU each, 4 VMs

 

 

 

image

Don’t get fooled!  This is not one host with 3 VMs and 1 host with 1 VM.  This is 2 hosts, each of which can have up to 4 VMs.  In the past we would have used Enterprise edition on each host.  That has been replaced by Windows Server 2012 Standard edition, that now has all the features and scalability of the Datacenter edition.

Take each host and size it for 4 VOSEs.  That means we need to assign 2 copies of Windows Server 2012 Standard edition to each host.  That’s 4 copies of WS2012 Standard.

2 Hosts, 2 CPUs each, 10 VMs

image

10 VMs with 2 hosts means that it is possible to have all 10 VMs on a single host.  You have two options to license each host for up to 10 VOSEs.

Firstly you could license each of the hosts with 5 copies of Windows Server 2012 Standard.  That will give you 10 (5 * 2) VOSEs.  This requires 10 (5 * 2 hosts ) copies of Standard at a cost of $8,820 using USA Open NL.

Alternatively you could license each host with 1 copy of Windows Server 2012 Datacenter, at a cost of $9,618.  The extra $798 will allow you to burst beyond 10 VOSEs to unlimited VOSEs.  Switching to licensing hosts using the Datacenter edition means we don’t have to count VOSEs and we have unrestricted mobility between hosts.

2 Hosts, 2 CPUs each, 20 VMs

image

We have exceed the magic number of 10, and now it is cheaper to license with the Datacenter edition with it’s unlimited VOSEs per host.  Each host has 2 CPUs, so each host requires 1 copy of Datacenter.  There are 2 hosts so we require 2 copies of Windows Server 2012 Datacenter.

You could add more hosts to this cluster and each could have unlimited VMs.  As long as the hosts have 1 or 2 CPUs each, each additional host requires only 1 copy of Windows Server 2012 Datacenter to license it for unlimited installs of Windows Server for the VMs on that host.

Lots of Hosts, Lots of VMs, 4 CPUs per Host

image

The magic number of 10 VOSEs is a dot in the rear view mirror.  We now have lots of hosts with lots of VMs flying all over the place.  Each host has 4 CPUs.  To license the VOSEs on each host, we will require licensing for 4 CPUs.  This will require 2 copies of Windows Server 2012 Datacenter per host, each covering 2 CPUs.

Live Migration Outside the Cluster

And new for WS2012 thanks to Live Migration living outside the cluster: you must ensure that the destination host is adequately licensed for VOSEs to accommodate the new VM. If this is an infrequent move then you could avail of the VL 90 day mobility right to reassign a license, ensuring the the old host is sufficiently licensed for remaining VOSEs and physical CPUs.

Hyper-V Server 2012

Hyper-V Server has no virtualisation rights and includes no free licensing for VOSEs.  Therefore it is irrelevant in this conversation.

Economically Speaking – Why Hyper-V Makes Sense

If you buy Windows Server licensing for a host to license your VMs, then you are a tickbox (or PowerShell cmdlet) and a reboot away from having Hyper-V.  Buying another product is just more money spent.  And let’s be honest, Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V is not what you might have used/looked at before.

Import/Export OVF With Hyper-V Using System Center 2012

A new extension has been released for System Center 2012 Virtual Machine Manager (VMM) that allows you to import and export virtual appliances using the Open Virtualisation Format (OVF).  OVF is a vendor neutral format for out-of-band migration of virtual appliance VMs.  This is the perfect way to get from one cloud to another, where specialisations would make direct import/export impossible.

There is more on this tool on TechNet

VMware also has an OVF tool that you can download.  I think that XenServer 5.6 has XenServer support baked in.

You can learn more about OVF on Wikipedia.

VMM 2012 System Requirements

The official TechNet content is a bit scattered about so I through I’d reorganise it and consolidate to make stuff easier to find.  The software requirements of Virtual Machine Manager (VMM/SCVMM) 2012 are easy:

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard, Enterprise or Datacenter with SP1
  • Windows Remote Management (WinRM) 2.0 – a part of W2008 R2
  • .NET 3.5 with SP1 (a feature in W2008 R2)
  • WAIK  for Windows 7

There’s a significant change for the database.  SQL Express is no longer supported.  You will need to migrate the VMM database to one of the supported versions/editions:

  • SQL Server 2008 R2 Enterprise/Standard x86/x64 (no news of support for the recent SP1 yet)
  • SQL Server 2008 Enterprise/Standard x86/x64 with Service Pack 2

Here’s the system requirements for VMM 2012:

Manage Up To 150 Hosts

Let’s be honest; how many of us really have anything close to 150 hosts to manage with VMM?  Hell; how many of us have 15 hosts to manage?  Anyway, here’s the system requirements and basic architecture for this scale of deployment.

image

You can run all of the VMM roles on a single server with the following hardware configuration:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 2.8 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

4 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

2 GB

40 GB
Disk Space (local DB) 80 GB 150 GB

Although you can run all the components on a single server, you may want to split them out onto different servers if you need VMM role fault tolerance.  You’re looking at something like this if that’s what you want to do:

image

A dedicated SQL server will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 2 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

4 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

80 GB

150 GB

A dedicated library server will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 3.2 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

2 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

Depends on what you store in it

Depends on what you store in it

A dedicated Self-Service Portal server will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 2.8 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

2 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

512 MB

20 GB

If all you want is hardware fault tolerance for VMM then the simple solution is to run VMM in a highly available virtual machine.  I don’t like System Center being a part of a general production Hyper-V cluster.  That’s because you create a chicken/egg situation with fault monitoring/responding.  If you want to virtualise System Center then consider setting up a dedicated host or cluster for the VMM, OpsMgr, ConfigMgr VMs.  DPM is realistically going to remain physical because of disk requirements.

Manage More Than 150 Hosts

It is recommended that you:

  • Not use VMM server to host your library.  Set the library up on a dedicated server/cluster.
  • Install SQL Server on a dedicated server/cluster.

The VMM server requirements are:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 3.6 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

4 GB

8 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

10 GB

50 GB

The database server requirements are:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 2.8 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

4 GB

8 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

150 GB

200 GB

A dedicated library server will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 3.2 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

2 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

Depends on what you store in it

Depends on what you store in it

A dedicated Self-Service Portal server will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz (x64)

Dual-Processor, Dual-Core, 3.2 GHz (x64) or greater

Memory

2 GB

8 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

10 GB

40 GB

VMM Console

The software requirements are:

  • Either Windows 7 with SP1 or Windows Server 2008 R2 with SP1
  • PowerShell 2.0 (included in the OS)
  • .NET 3.5 SP1 (installed by default in Windows 7 and a feature in W2008 R2 – VMM setup will enable it for you)

Managing up to 150 hosts will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU Pentium 4, 550 MHz

Pentium 4, 1 GHz or more

Memory

512 MB

1 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

512 MB

2 GB

Managing over 150 hosts will require:

Component Minimum Recommended
CPU

Pentium 4, 1 GHz

Pentium 4, 2 GHz or more

Memory

1 GB

2 GB
Disk space (no local DB)

512 MB

4 GB

Managed Hosts

Supported Hyper-V hosts are below. 

Parent OS Edition Service Pack
Windows Server 2008 R2 (Full or Server Core)

Enterprise or Datacenter

Service Pack 1 or earlier

Hyper-V Server 2008 R2  
Windows Server 2008 (Full or Server Core)

Enterprise or Datacenter

Service Pack 1 or earlier

Please note that the following are not listed as supported:

  • Hyper-V Server 2008
  • Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard edition
  • Windows Server 2008 Standard edition

In the beta, Windows Server 2008 is not supported.

Supported VMware hosts are listed below.  They must be managed by vCenter Server 4.1.

  • ESXi 4.1
  • ESX 4.1
  • ESXi 3.5
  • ESX 3.5

There is no mention of vSphere/ESXi 5 at the moment.  That’s understandable – both VMM and the VMware v5 product set were being developed at the same time.  Maybe support for v5 will appear later.

Citrix XenServer 5.6 FP1 can also be managed as standalone hosts or as Resource Pools if you deploy the Microsoft SCVMM XenServer Integration Suite to your hosts.

Bare Metal Host Deployment

The requirements for being able to use VMM 2012 to deploy Hyper-V hosts to bare metal machines are:

Item Notes
Windows Server 2008 R2 Windows Deployment Services (WDS) PXE Server to boot the bare metal up on the network.  No other PXE service is supported.
Boot Management Controller (BMC)

This is a server management card:

  • Intelligent Platform Management Interface (IPMI) versions 1.5 or 2.0
  • Data Center Management Interface (DCMI) version 1.0
  • Hewlett-Packard Integrated Lights-Out (iLO) 2
  • System Management Architecture for Server Hardware (SMASH) version 1.0 over WS-Management (WS-Man)
VHD image A Windows Server 2008 R2 host OS captured as a generalized VHD image.  Have a look into WIM2VHD or maybe using a VM to create this.
Host Hardware Drivers NIC, Storage, etc.

Update Management

A dedicated WSUS root server, running WSUS 3.0 SP2.  It cannot be a downstream server because that is not supported.  There will be a lot of processed updates so this may require a dedicated server (possible a VM).  If you install WSUS on a VMM server cluster then you must install the WSUS Administrator Console on each node in that cluster.

What to Expect From SCVMM 2012

Microsoft released more details about System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2012 at TechEd Europe 2010 last week.  The release is scheduled for H2 2011.  In the meantime, the next VMM release will be Service Pack 1 for VMM 2008 R2, probably 30 days after the release of SP1 for Windows Server 2008 R2 (to give us Dynamic Memory support).  The server SP is estimated to be RTM in March 2011.

image

Interestingly, and very powerfully, we’re told that VMM 2012 will have the ability to build Hyper-V hosts and host clusters.  Storage and network (VLAN tags and IP ranges) can also be provisioned!  Wow – VMM will become the first thing you need (or really, really want) to install in a Hyper-V deployment!

VMM is moving to being a private cloud product (management and provisioning) rather than just a virtualisation management solution.  Provisioning is more than just pushing out VMs.  It involves deploying services, as well as configuring storage and networking.  Service templates are at the heart of that.  We’ve seen the demos before; you define an application architecture (web servers, database servers, network, etc), define how to scale (server elasticity), and then deploy that service template to deploy the servers and roles.  The elasticity gives you dynamic growth, a key component of cloud computing.

You can deploy three types of service to VMs in a service template:

  • MSDeploy: web apps
  • Server App-V: virtualised services
  • Database apps

Application deployment improvements include custom scripting support.  You can also specify roles/features to enable in Windows Server in the hardware template.

Let’s not knock management.  Long time readers know I’m an IT megalomaniac.  I want complete control and knowledge over my systems.  MS aren’t stupid.  They know that medium and large companies will have a mix of hypervisors.  And that’s why the 2012 release includes additional support for XenServer.

Virtualisation is the foundation of new IT infrastructures, and hence the line-of-business applications, and even the business!  And that’s why the VMM service needs to be made highly available.  That’s not possible now.  We can cluster file services (library) and database (service data and library metadata) but not the service.  The 2012 release changes that.

The delegation model is expanded:

  1. VMM Administrator: manage everything
  2. Delegated Administrator: manage delegated infrastructure
  3. Cloud Manager: manage a delegated cloud and provision it into sub-clouds
  4. Self-Service User: deploy and manage virtual machines in sub-clouds

The outlook is cloudy.  Everything refers to clouds in the interface.  Get over the new ribbon interface and you’ll see that the navigation bar in the VMs and Services view has the traditional Host Groups and a new Clouds section.

A cloud is made up of other clouds, VMware resource pools, or host groups.  You will add one or more networks to a cloud.  You can add load balancer templates to clouds.  Different kinds of storage (high or low performance, for example) can be specified.  Ah – a change I want: now you can specify read-only and read-write library shares.  This has been an all-or-nothing thing up to now.  Maybe we don’t want to allow self-service users to store VMs in the library.  Storage is not cheap!!!  We can specify quotas for number of virtual machines, vCPUs, RAM, storage, and memory.  We can also specify if VMs can be made highly available or not (on a cluster). 

I am looking forward to the beta and testing the new functionality out.

Survey on How Irish Companies Would Spend IT Budget

TechCentral.ie did a small survey on how Irish organisations would spend their IT budget.  They question they were asked was “If you had 50% of your total IT budget to spend on one area alone, what would it be?”

The results were:

  • Infrastructure: 61%
  • Virtualisation/(Public/Private)Cloud Computing: 24%
  • Applications: 15%

I was somewhat surprised by the results, and not at the same time.  Here’s why.

Everything we’ve been hearing since the recession started in 2008 (the slide really started in August 2007) is that business could optimise their operations by implementing business intelligence applications to improve their decision making.  These are big projects costing hundreds of thousands and even millions of Euros.  But this survey tells us that Irish IT only would spend 15% of their budget on this area.  This surprised me.

Cloud computing/virtualisation also ranked pretty still brings in a quarter of the budget.  One would expect that everyone should have something done on the virtualisation front by now.  It’s clear that even a small virtualisation project can save an organisation a lot of money on hardware support contracts and power consumption (remember that we were  recently ranked as the second most expensive country in Europe to buy electricity in and we have an additional 5% Green Party tax coming for power).  Getting 10-1 consolidation ratios will drive that bill down.  Those on an EA or similar subscription licensing can even see similar consolidation of their MS licensing, especially with Hyper-V or XenServer.  Putting that argument to a financial controller in a simple 1 page document will normally get a quick approval.

But, I’m finding that many have either not done any virtualisation at all yet or have literally just dipped their toes in the water by deploying one or two standalone hosts as point solutions, a minor part of a mainly physical server infrastructure.  There is still a lot of virtualisation work out there.  And as regualr readers will know, I see a virtualisation project as being much more than just Hyper-V, XenServer, or ESX.

61% of respondents said they would spend 50% of their budget on infrastructure.  That could mean anything to be honest.  I expect that most servers out there are reaching their end of life points.  Server sales have been pretty low since 2007.  We’re in the planning stages for 2011.  3 year old hardware is entering the final phases of support from their manufacturers.  Those with independent servicing contracts will see the costs rise significantly because replacement components will become more expensive and harder to find, thus driving up costs and risks for the support service providers.

I was at a HP event in 2008 where we were told that the future in hardware was storage.  I absolutely agree.  Everyone I seem to talk to has one form of storage challenge or another.  Enterprise storage is expensive and it’s gone as soon as it is installed.  Virtualisation requires better storage than standalone servers, especially if you cluster the hosts and use some kind of shared storage.

DR is still a hot topic.  The events of 2001 in New York or the later London bombings did not have the same effect here as it did in those cities or countries.  People are still struggling.  Virtualisation is making it easier (it’s easier to replace storage or VHD/MVDK files than to replicate an N-tier physical application installation) but there is a huge technical and budget challenge when it comes to bandwidth.  Our electricity is expensive but that’s nothing to our bandwidth.  For example, a (up to) 3MB domestic broadband package (with phone rental) package is €52/month in Ireland, where available

The thing that I believe is missing is systems management.  I recently wrote in a document that an IT infrastructure was like a lawn.  If you manage it then it is tidy and under control.  If you don’t then it becomes full of weeds and out of control.  Eventually it reaches a point where it will be easier to rip out the lawn completely and reseed the lawn, taking up time and money.  Before virtualisation was a hot topic and I was still contracting before going in the cloud/hosting business, most organisations here were clueless when it came to systems management.  Many considered a continuous ping to be monitoring.  Others would waste money and effort on dodgy point solutions to do things like push out software or audit infrastructure.  Those who bought System Center failed to hire people who knew what to do with it, e.g. I twice trained junior helpdesk contractors in a bank (that I now indirectly own shares in because I’m a tax payer) to use SMS 2003 R2 to deploy software.  They were clueless at the start and remained that way because they were too junior.  Maybe those organisations realise what mistakes they’ve made and realise that they need to take control.  Many virtualisation solutions will be mature by now.  That means people have done the VMware ESX thing and had VM sprawl.  They’ve also learned that vSphere, just like Microsoft’s VMM by itself is not management for a complete infrastructure.  You need to manage everything, including the network, servers, storage, virtualisation, operating systems, services and applications.

EDIT:

I think there’s also a growing desire to deal with the desktop, much for the same reasons as I mentioned with the server.  Desktops right now are running possibly 5 year old XP images.  A lot of desktop hardware out there is very old.   There are business reasons to deploy a newer operating system like Windows 7.  Solutions like session virtualisation, application virtualisation, desktop virtualisation, and client virtualisation are all opening up new opportunities for CIOs to tackle technical and business issues.  The problem for them is that all of this is new technology and they don’t have the know-how.

There is a lot of potential out there if you’re in the services industry.  But maybe all of this is moot.  We’re assuming people have a budget.  Heck, Ireland might not even have an economy after this week!

PubForum: Virtualization Buzz – Comparing Products

This is the first session I am attending this morning.  It is being presented by Saša Mašić.

3 comments for ESX from the audience:

  • OS Support
  • Administration tools easier to use
  • Available appliances from third parties

Some incorrect comments from the audience about backup at the host level.  Claims that only VMware supports this with third party products.  Untrue.  You most certainly can do this with Hyper-V.  It’s even better because it has cascading VSS from the host/file system, into the VM and then into the VM’s VSS writers.  I make a brief response/correction but leave it there … I smell fanboyism and am not here for an argument.

The speaker rarely gets customer requests for XenServer implementations and asks the audience about their experiences.  It appears that it tends to be restricted to organizations who are heavily invested in Citrix licensing.

1 person has done Xen in production – using Essentials for management.  The conversation has switched to management.

Only a few of us (including me) think Storage VMotion is a valuable feature.

It turns out that I am the only Hyper-V user in the audience.  I’m not very surprised – PubForum folks are very ahead of the curve and they would have been invested in VMware a long time ago.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Deploy a Virtualized Session-Based Remote Desktop Services Solution

Microsoft has released guidance on how to deploy a virtualised Remote Desktop Services (aka Terminal Services) Session Host (aka Terminal Server) on a machine/hardware virtualisation platform.

“This document provides guidance on deploying Remote Desktop Session Host (RD Session Host) and other Remote Desktop Services role services in a virtualized environment with minimal hardware resources. The document also provides scalability information for a virtualized Remote Desktop Services role configuration by using the Knowledge Worker scenario to help size hardware for similar workloads”.

If this subject interests you then you should check out an independent white paper by The Virtual Reality Check that compares the performance of Terminal Services on VMware vSphere 4.0, Citrix XenServer 5.5 and Microsoft’s Hyper-V 2.0 (Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V).

I’ve deployed fairly small solutions on Hyper-V and they worked fine.  One of the nice things about virtualising them is that you can control your resources nicely: start out small and grow as required in a very rapid manner.

VMware Takes A Shot At Azure

I just read this (part of a larger article) on VMware in the cloud:

Jackson also took the opportunity to get in a dig about Microsoft‘s Azure cloud computing initiative.

Microsoft is painting a beautiful picture about cloud computing, but according to its own internal documents is not using its own Hyper-V virtualization platform because it cannot easily pool CPU, memory, and networking resources, Jackson said.

“Azure represents a one-way ticket to a desert island,” he said.

First 5000 Downloads Free: Partition Manager 10 for Virtual Machines

I’d normally post this one in the evening after work but it is a limited time offer.  I just got an email and the contents were:

“Partition Manager 10 for Virtual Machines is out.

Now all IT administrators have a great chance to have Partition Manager 10 for Virtual Machines for FREE – currently we’re announcing this giveaway for up to 5000 copies.

It is a special version of our Linux/DOS bootable environment that contains fully functional Paragon Partition Manager 10 Professional. It is optimized to work with virtual disks of any virtualization software vendor √ backup/restore virtualized systems, re-partition and clone virtual disks, fix boot problems, optimize performance of NTFS and FAT file systems, etc.

The software and user manual can be downloaded from here.

Please, note that it requires registration”.

It is for non-commercial use only.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Hyper-V, VMware, Xen All Compared

Techtarget has a short article that lists the pros and cons of the hardware virtualisation solutions from Microsoft, Citrix and VMware.  It’s a quick read and gives decision makers a high level comparison of the big 3 solutions.  The author does a good job of staying neutral and gives good advice.  Each solution has benefits and advantages that are unique.  Find what your real requirements are and then map those to the features.  My add-on to that: do lots of research.  Don’t take the word of a marketing or sales person.

Technorati Tags: ,,,