May 8, 2015 at 11:08 am
DBA_Rob (5/8/2015)
About 80% virtual, but unlike many of the others that posted so far, our virtual environment is certainly worse performance than physical. Here we overload the virtual so much to save cost on hardware that we kill performance.
Do you mean db performance is worse, or all types of application servers?
Do you treat database servers differently than other types?
May 8, 2015 at 11:14 am
100% virtualized - 12 instances (dev, test, production). No measurable performance hits since the VMs live on a screaming SAN and we have the latest Dell hosts with 256 GB of RAM in each one. The benefits of virtualization far outweigh any negatives in my opinion.
May 8, 2015 at 11:21 am
We are 98% virtualized.
May 8, 2015 at 11:39 am
100% physical, on SQL 2005. This is a manufacturing plant, where the devices that integrate w/ the database are legacy and are not going to upgrade.
May 8, 2015 at 12:25 pm
192 SQL Servers
48 physical
144 virtual
We virtualize nearly everything; there are two reasons for using physical machines:
* lack of vendor support for virtualization at the application level
* storage requirements are huge, and we need specialized disk configurations to support either size or IOPS
May 8, 2015 at 1:14 pm
100% over couple hundred servers, for DR, maintenance, continuity. SQL 2012 mostly. Data warehouse is all solid state with Kaminario All-Flash Array. 😎
[font="Courier New"]____________________________________________________________________________________________
Remember as you walk down lifes road, don't forget to stop and pee on the bushes - Thordog[/font]
May 8, 2015 at 3:51 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/8/2015)
PhilipC (5/8/2015)
0%for this reason " it's the human concerns or lack of confidence that prevents virtualization."
Senior Management at the company I work for just ignore the fact of visualization and I've talked about it until I'm blue in the face. It's a joke really as none of the servers are running a high work-load and licensing costs could come down dramatically.
They don't believe in it? Worried about performance? Any "reasons" they give you that make any sense?
They don't believe in it, and more or less don't even want to discuss it anymore. In the past they've said virtual simply won't stand up to a physical server performance wise. Perhaps there's a little bit of truth to that but not in the numbers they're saying and certainly not with the work-loads that are being used. They just continue to put their heads in the sand and cost the company tens of thousands more in licensing costs.
The biggest joke of all is that there's a physical server for a 3GB database running Enterprise Edition for 5 users with 2 Hex Core Processors in there and 52GB RAM.... Licensing madness :hehe: And no this database doesn't use any Enterprise edition features.
The funny thing is as well is that we're using 5 year old physical servers as well.... Buy some modern servers, visualize them, and the over-load of visualization probably wouldn't even be seen.
May 8, 2015 at 4:11 pm
PhilipC (5/8/2015)
They don't believe in it, and more or less don't even want to discuss it anymore. In the past they've said virtual simply won't stand up to a physical server performance wise. Perhaps there's a little bit of truth to that but not in the numbers they're saying and certainly not with the work-loads that are being used. They just continue to put their heads in the sand and cost the company tens of thousands more in licensing costs.
The biggest joke of all is that there's a physical server for a 3GB database running Enterprise Edition for 5 users with 2 Hex Core Processors in there and 52GB RAM.... Licensing madness :hehe: And no this database doesn't use any Enterprise edition features.
The funny thing is as well is that we're using 5 year old physical servers as well.... Buy some modern servers, visualize them, and the over-load of visualization probably wouldn't even be seen.
Crazy
May 9, 2015 at 4:32 am
My company is heavily invested in virtualization with over 30,000 virtualized servers.
You have to have a strong justification not to use a virtualized platform.
MSSQL wise we won't ever be 100% as I don't really feel comfortable with clustering on VM's so prefer these to be physical.
There are circumstances where size matters and having a high CPU usage 36+ core single instance SQL server on a VM would be impractical.
To give you some figures I think at my latest count we had over 800 MSSQL VM's and 30 physical. Of the 30 physical all but 3-4 were clusters providing specific services.
I'm expecting these figures to it over 1000 Virtual MSSQL servers by year end.
For other database technologies we also have some virtualized Sybase ASE on Wintel and have a few Oracle wintel VM's however we are migrating away from these as they were a P2V temporary solutions. Our prefered platforms for Sybase ASE is AIX or Wintel and Oracle is AIX or Linux. These could also be considered virtualized.
May 9, 2015 at 6:55 am
100% virtualized here in both dev and prod as well.
I was making a push to have NoSQL to be on physical because of the reduction in performance when virtualized from a few whitepapers. But, I'm losing the battle.
May 9, 2015 at 3:22 pm
We are 100% virtual on SQL. We switched in 2008 (Vmware with 2 SQL servers and 8 other servers) and saw no performance loss. To be fair, the hardware was replaced at the same time. Reason - DR and ease of spinning up a new servers (now running 6 SQL servers and 24 other servers on two hosts and 1 SAN).
May 10, 2015 at 5:08 pm
99% Virtualised
~100 SQL Servers
1 left that is Physical but we're looking to virtualise it shortly
May 11, 2015 at 10:26 am
I manage 120 SQL servers across our prod, dev, and QA environments. We are 100% virtualized.
May 11, 2015 at 11:30 am
95%
July 24, 2015 at 8:36 pm
My shop is using virtual servers for all current or new workloads and transitioning from old physical servers.
We have probably 90% virtualized and that number is growing weekly.
Our virtual servers are replicated between two datacenters and use VMDRS for performance and continuity.
The virtual environment is shared between SQL, application and infrastructure services but VM pools maintain and allocate resources automatically.
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 69 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply