SBS 2008 - To Hyper-V or not to Hyper-V

Discussion in 'Windows Small Business Server' started by Richard K, Sep 7, 2009.

  1. Richard K

    Richard K Guest

    I have a brand new physical server box with 16gb RAM and 2x750GB drives
    ready for a Raid 1 environment ready to go for SBS 2008 premium. My first
    inclination is to just install the SBS 2008 prem including the SQL 2008 on
    the same physical box. Hyper-V is new to me and with this machine I can use
    it as a "play" machine for a while before it has to move to production with
    the SBS 2008.

    What would you do and how/would you mix the Hyper-V into the mix and why? I
    only have the 1 physical box but it should be well enough equiped to do alot
    of things.

    -Richard K
    Richard K, Sep 7, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. Richard K

    Leythos Guest

    I would use Hyper-V if you have Dual CPU's with Quad Cores, but I would
    have one said of RAID-1 drives on a controller for the Parent and the
    Child SBS 2008 installation and a second RAID 0+1 or RAID 5 for the
    Child SQL server install. I would set SBS 08 to use 2 cores of the first
    CPU and SQL to use 6 cores if SQL has a heavy load, if SQL has a light
    load then I would set SBS for all 4 cores of CPU 1 and SQL for all 4
    cores of CPU 2.
    Leythos, Sep 7, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. Richard K

    Richard K Guest

    In my case this is not a dual cpu hardware setup and I only have 2 hard
    drives planned for a RAID 1. The SBS will have about 10-12 clients and only
    3 of them will use a LOB app for the SQL so very little load. I'm assuming
    by your description I probably don't have the right hardware set up here?

    My bigger question is what are the benefits of doing this as a hyper-V vs a
    standard install?
    Richard K, Sep 7, 2009
  4. Richard K

    Leythos Guest

    I have no real way of knowing without knowing your customers, but a
    Single CPU machine would be my last choice for Hyper-V with SBS and
    anything else.
    Ease, speed, cost is significantly lower, etc...
    Leythos, Sep 7, 2009
  5. I'd tend to agree on the single CPU, but even more on the hard disk as
    limiting factors for a satisfactory hyper-v experience. Depending on load,
    you might well be able to run a few VMs on that box as far as CPU is
    concerned, assuming quad core, but you'll max out the I/O subsystem almost
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Sep 7, 2009
  6. Richard K

    Kerry Brown Guest

    I agree with the answers you've received so far. A single RAID 1 array is
    not the way to go for Hyper-V. I would have a small RAID 1 for the parent OS
    (SATA OK here) and separate (SAS) arrays for each child that uses
    significant disk I/O. In this case both the SBS server and the SQL server
    could consume a fair bit of disk I/O. Disk I/O is usually the first
    bottleneck you'll hit with virtualization. You have to plan for and build
    the vm's just as if they were real servers. Your setup would be fine for a
    "play" machine but only minimally adequate for a very small production
    network. I'd go with more and probably smaller hard drives to separate the
    Kerry Brown, Sep 7, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.