September 8, 2005 at 2:32 am
Hi Guys,
(This is a completly seperate issue to my previous post)
Has anyone tried deploying SQL server 2000 on a VMware virtual machine? Are there any big advantages / disadvantages ?
Thanks.
September 8, 2005 at 4:34 am
Hi Matt.
We installed two months ago two IBM X445 servers with VMware compiled and dedicated operating system.
We also installed 5 servers with SQL 2000 and we didn't have any problems.
We decided to install only preproduction environment on VMware.
Let me know if you need something else.
Regards
Diego
September 8, 2005 at 8:48 am
I have also installed SQL server to several different VMWare systems. We ran test systems on VMWare for about 6 months and have had production running on VMWare for about 6 months after that. I don't think SQL server knows the difference. It is faster to reboot and if we need to build another system we can do it in a matter of minutes.
September 8, 2005 at 9:11 am
The difference between a VMware environment and a physical server depends on resource reservation. With VMware you can share processors, memory and so on with many virtual machines. You can also decide to assign to one or more VM the resorces without share them with the other VMs.
Which VMware version did you install?
September 9, 2005 at 8:43 am
We have at least ten or more VMware machines with no issues , other than performance once in a while. We are running SQL2K SP3A.
September 9, 2005 at 8:49 am
Do you know if your Virtual Machines with SQL have dedicated resources or shared?
September 9, 2005 at 10:24 am
Hello,
For those who use VM on the SQL servers, which VM and what version are you running? Thanks.
September 9, 2005 at 10:26 am
VMware ESX Server 2.5.1 with SQL 2000 SP3a.
September 12, 2005 at 3:21 pm
Hi,
We haven't actually installed VMware yet - we are just looking at it as part of a disaster recovery proposal.
I know that you are supposed to have the data and logs in different drives - and ideally the indexes as well - so I was wondering how you would handle that within a VMware machine? Or not...
September 13, 2005 at 7:43 am
Hi Matt.
You manage everything directly from VMware. In our environmnet we assigned 1 TB (more or less) of external storage to the X445 IBM server divided in 5 or 6 LUNs. You then install and create a new Virtual Machines and you will assign to them the volumes you need.
One of the best thing is that you just have one physical server and it is a good way for diastery recovery .....
September 13, 2005 at 1:47 pm
The only place we used VMWare was in our development and test areas. It worked fine there.
For production it didn't make sense because our SQL boxes were already a "shared" or virtual resource to many application and they need all the horsepower they can get.
/*****************
If most people are not willing to see the difficulty, this is mainly because, consciously or unconsciously, they assume that it will be they who will settle these questions for the others, and because they are convinced of their own capacity to do this. -Friedrich August von Hayek
*****************/
September 17, 2005 at 9:11 am
Vmware is an amazing piece of software. Life will never be the same once we get this little beauty installed 🙂
November 29, 2005 at 2:49 am
Hi Matt.
How does your VMware environment work now?
November 29, 2005 at 9:56 am
We're also heavily using SQL Server on VM in non-production. We've gone with ESX Server. It's substantially more efficient than GSX Server on Windows based on how it's architected (as lean an OS as possible to get VMWare up and running). It has worked out well for us.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply