|
Does anyone know where I can find any info on vMotion compatibility across Core2 processors? The official compatibility database doesn't seem to acknowledge Core2 (unless I just missed it somewhere). I'm salvaging a few workstation from the trash at work and wanted to see if I could get another small (64bit compatible) whitebox lab set up.
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
luminalflux posted:Well yeah but I'm getting tired of all these trips to the colo facility on the other side of town, and one host is running vms that aren't on shared storage for performance reasons (but downtime for these is begrudgingly tolerated). Guess which host has an iLO password tat nobody remembers? Are you licensed for storage vMotion? Also, what in the world shared storage do you have that under-performs local storage?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Does anyone know where I can find any info on vMotion compatibility across Core2 processors? The official compatibility database doesn't seem to acknowledge Core2 (unless I just missed it somewhere). Vmotion works on some E8500s, what model number is it
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Are you licensed for storage vMotion? Also, what in the world shared storage do you have that under-performs local storage? Shared storage is iSCSI over 2x1 Gbe, local storage is SAS. The VMs that are on local storage are for our testing environment, we moved them there since their disk traffic was interfering with production disk bandwidth for the websites I run. I'm licensed for Storage vMotion, but to be honest moving 300+ GB to the SAN and then back takes longer than just rebooting and fixing the problems with the apps not restarting correctly.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 18:58
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Vmotion works on some E8500s, what model number is it I don't have detailed specs yet. I just see a bunch of "Core2 inside" stickers on this pallet. I should have investigated further before I asked, but I didn't know if there was any unofficial EVC guidelines for Core2 systems in general. They're dated mostly '07 so I doubt they're anything more than E6400s. Probably more trouble than it's worth for a lovely small whitebox lab, but beggars can't be choosers. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 19:03 on May 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Also, what in the world shared storage do you have that under-performs local storage? And yeah svMotion would have trivialized the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
Aaearon posted:I'm looking to pull the trigger on the whitebox configuration below. I'm planning on using my existing qnap 219p+ as a datastore using NFS. Please use neweggs Public Wishlist feature. Nobody deserves to have to click 5 different links just to answer questions. Even better to just tell us the specs, though. 
vty fucked around with this message at 19:56 on May 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:And yeah svMotion would have trivialized the whole thing. Doing that many hosts in one go (select all -> migrate storage) doesn't work that well, it needs to be micromanaged (at least on that combination of controller and SAN). Of course it's scriptable, but so is fixing the reboot problems so I just reboot instead.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2012 20:35
|
|
|
vty posted:Please use neweggs Public Wishlist feature. Nobody deserves to have to click 5 different links just to answer questions. Even better to just tell us the specs, though. APEVIA X-QPACK-NW-BK/420 Black Aluminum 1.0 w/ ABS plastic front panel MicroATX Desktop Computer Case 420W Power Supply SUPERMICRO MBD-X9SCM-F-O LGA 1155 Intel C204 Micro ATX Intel Xeon E3 Server Motherboard Patriot Xporter XT Boost 4GB Flash Drive (USB2.0 Portable) Model PEF4GUSB Kingston 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600) ECC Unbuffered Server Memory Model KVR1333D3E9SK2/8G Intel Xeon E3-1230 Sandy Bridge 3.2GHz LGA 1155 80W Quad-Core Server Processor BX80623E31230
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 00:06
|
|
|
Aaearon posted:Intel Xeon E3-1230 Sandy Bridge 3.2GHz LGA 1155 80W Quad-Core Server Processor BX80623E31230 I see you changed your CPU from your original post, but still didn't listen to/respond to my feedback. The E3-1230 (as well as the E3-1220 that you originally posted) does not have onboard video baked in. If you do not want to have to throw in a video card for the install or bios work or any local TSM work, spend the 30 bucks more for the E3-1235.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
What are y'all using for anti-virus for your virtualisation enviroments? We have 3 ESXi 5 hosts with around 30 VMs on - we are also moving to a VMWare View solution for workstations with around 250 end users. I was looking at the thing from mcaffee - anything else you'd suggest? Alctel fucked around with this message at 00:08 on May 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 15:54
|
|
|
Moey posted:I see you changed your CPU from your original post, but still didn't listen to/respond to my feedback. The board has onboard video (Nuvoton WPCM450RA0BX) according to Newegg's page so I went with the E3-1230 vs the E3-1235 because the board's onboard video should cover it, right? Totally possible I am missing something but that is why I went with the E3-1230 vs the 35.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
Aaearon posted:The board has onboard video (Nuvoton WPCM450RA0BX) according to Newegg's page so I went with the E3-1230 vs the E3-1235 because the board's onboard video should cover it, right? Nope, you are correct! I didn't look at the motherboard in detail. With consumer 1155 boards, most have connectors for video, but will only work if the CPU has integrated graphics. That mobo has you covered it seems.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
Moey posted:Nope, you are correct! I didn't look at the motherboard in detail. With consumer 1155 boards, most have connectors for video, but will only work if the CPU has integrated graphics. That mobo has you covered it seems. In fact that one is also an IPMI so you don't even need a keyboard or mouse hooked up to the physical machine, you just need a web browser and an ethernet cable connected to the IPMI port.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
Quick question: does anyone know if Veeam FastSCP supports ESXi 5.0u1? It doesn't say anywhere on the Veeam website and I'm pretty sure that last time I tried it I had issues but I'm in a bit of a bind at the moment and really need to pull these VMDKs off of these datastores quicker.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2012 10:29
|
|
|
Alctel posted:What are y'all using for anti-virus for your virtualisation enviroments? Getting into vShield and introspection based AV for such a small environment is probably overkill on the complexity and cost front - you'd almost certainly be better off using a standard AV product and managing your scan/update schedules. We currently do normal AV for 5500 VDI machines in this manner, with only a few edge cases causing issues. A moderately well configured in-guest AV has a simple overhead which reduces the number of guests per host, but not by a massive amount. I'm looking at a PoC for MOVE early next year, but couldn't tell you if we'll adopt from this far out; we're a very large and very conservative environment, so other cutting edge users might have a different take. luminalflux posted:Is there seriously no way to set the iLO password of an ESXi 4.1 host on HP hardware via software? In Linux there's hponcfg that can do this, and a .vib is provided by HP for hponcfg for ESXi 5.0, but I can't find one for 4.1. Don't really want to upgrade to ESXi 5 either.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2012 15:28
|
|
|
Mausi posted:Getting into vShield and introspection based AV for such a small environment is probably overkill on the complexity and cost front - you'd almost certainly be better off using a standard AV product and managing your scan/update schedules. That should have been VMWare View for 250 users, not 50! I guess we should look at a standard AV product then.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
Question about Essentials Plus licensing: As I've said before, we have 2 vSphere 5 Standard hosts right now, with no vCenter license. If we DO end up with an Essentials Plus license, that can go right on our current servers, right? It won't mean I have to do a bunch of reinstalls/conversions again will it?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 00:29
|
|
|
Frozen-Solid posted:Question about Essentials Plus licensing: Correct. When you install vCenter, you add your licenses. Then when you add your hosts, you can just select which license you want to apply.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 00:45
|
|
|
snip nvm, forgot you were the guy who got sold stuff half backwards
Dilbert As FUCK fucked around with this message at 00:55 on May 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
Cool. As long as we're not totally screwed now that things were, basically, installed backwards.  I just don't want to lose the last month of preparation and conversions.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 03:36
|
|
|
My media server finally poo poo the bed, and I am not willing to put any work into fixing it. I've decided to virtualize it, but the server runs a bunch of hard drives. I want to build a VM to replace it, and I want only that VM to recognize the extra hard drives. I want every other VM on the physical host to remain blissfully unaware of the extra drives. I won't even ask if it's possible - I only need to know how! VMware Workstation 8.0, naturally. Any help, much appreciated.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
So I have a project coming up where I need to virtualize some servers. Its MS SQL and IIS based. Theoretically they want the ability to eventually have 10,000 people simultaneously running transactions on this (HAHAHAHA, no). But to start out I speced out a couple HP blade chassis with 2x 4 socket/ 64 core AMD blades in each chassis. I have a 4gbit fibre channel san this connects into. Also I'm probably going to pull 10gige out of it, just because the equipment is cheap enough at this point. So is it bad news to run databases in vitual machines still? I was going to use redhat's KVM virtualization tools to do the VMs.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 07:13
|
|
|
How about you take a look at the load and IO sizing first then worry about the hardware. 10k simultaneous users could mean anything depending on typical transaction load per session.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 11:54
|
|
|
ValhallaSmith posted:So is it bad news to run databases in vitual machines still? I was going to use redhat's KVM virtualization tools to do the VMs. Either way, to answer your question, we run every DB server we have in VMware today. None of them are nearly that size, but to echo evil_bunny, IO will likely be a problem that you need to solve long before CPU and memory.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 14:30
|
|
|
We run all of our Dev MSSQL against win2k8r2 in VMware 4.1 on DL380s backed over 10Gb to NetApp 6240s. They try to cook it, still hasn't happened.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
ValhallaSmith posted:So I have a project coming up where I need to virtualize some servers. Its MS SQL and IIS based. Theoretically they want the ability to eventually have 10,000 people simultaneously running transactions on this (HAHAHAHA, no). But to start out I speced out a couple HP blade chassis with 2x 4 socket/ 64 core AMD blades in each chassis. I have a 4gbit fibre channel san this connects into. Also I'm probably going to pull 10gige out of it, just because the equipment is cheap enough at this point. No running DB's on VM's is not a huge no no, but there are lots of things you will need to concider when doing so. MSClustering want RDM badly, they improved VMFS 5 a great deal but I believe MS asks for RDM's. As stated 10k people is a lot so what is the load per transaction on them, doing vm affenity on VM's that do a lot of network talk on the same host will do network talk at ram speed/latency which would be great for 10k users doing SQL/IIS transactions. How much ram are you putting in this thing as well, 64 cores is great and all but without gauging the ram needs you may just be spend a lot of money on idle cores.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:08
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:How about you take a look at the load and IO sizing first then worry about the hardware. This assumes I actually know that much. They haven't even told me the name of the company that is supplying the software. All I got was a vague spec of dual quad cores for the db server. Which was then countered in the next page with a network diagram showing multiple blade centers, huge cisco switches and a 36TB NAS. All of which is way way overkill for the maybe 80 users it will start with.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 08:48
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:My media server finally poo poo the bed, and I am not willing to put any work into fixing it. I've decided to virtualize it, but the server runs a bunch of hard drives. I want to build a VM to replace it, and I want only that VM to recognize the extra hard drives. I want every other VM on the physical host to remain blissfully unaware of the extra drives. I won't even ask if it's possible - I only need to know how! If you're not running as a root/admin user, you won't be able to do this. For Windows, identifying what disk is what can be done via diskpart or looking at the Disk Mangler and looking at the order there. Edit: Auto-mounting is something you probably need to disable on Windows or Linux, whatever you're running. Diskpart has an automount option that will assign drive letters to anything recognized by Windows. You can consider removing the drive letter on your physical Windows install if you want. For Linux, just stop it from automounting however way your distro recommends or is equipped for. Whatever you do, don't access a non-clustered filesystem from multiple "hosts" at the same time. Kachunkachunk fucked around with this message at 13:09 on May 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 13:06
|
|
|
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113036 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182230 Thinking about ordering a 16 core interlagos + 32 more gigs of ram for my studies, but from the benchmarks the Xeon 6c/12 threads are right on the heals of this. So for ~1025 I could go with 1 6c Xeon/64Gb/dual socket mobo, then grab another when I feel the need Or spend 1000 and get 16c/64gb/single socket mobo and let 16 cores lasts me. I am leaning towards intel as Centos plays much better on it than amd, then run workstation on Centos
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
Kachunkachunk posted:Whatever you do, don't access a non-clustered filesystem from multiple "hosts" at the same time. Corvettefisher posted:Thinking about ordering a 16 core interlagos + 32 more gigs of ram for my studies, but from the benchmarks the Xeon 6c/12 threads are right on the heals of this.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:
haha, you wish! No my VCAP-DCA/VCP5-VDI sims are starting up and I am running +27GB in ram usage normally. Might as well get 64
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:haha, you wish! You were originally running this all within workstation right? Or have you switched to a dedicated ESXi box?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
Moey posted:You were originally running this all within workstation right? Or have you switched to a dedicated ESXi box? Windows 7 x64 => Workstation 2012 => ESXi clusters/SAN/WINDOWS AD/vCenter and hitting +27GB in usage. When I played with Centos and workstation on that I shaved off like 3 GB but still my CPU was hitting >90% I am debating heavily on if I should just Laptop w/ vsphere => ESXi base hypervisor => VM's ESXi installs -or- Centos=>workstation=>esxi=>guest OS.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:17
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Currently I am doing I would bypass workstation entirely. ESXi on baremetal then more ESXi instances running inside. That is what I am currently setting up (just waiting on my CPU to be shipped).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:22
|
|
|
Moey posted:I would bypass workstation entirely. ESXi on baremetal then more ESXi instances running inside. That is what I am currently setting up (just waiting on my CPU to be shipped). Normally I would say sure but I do like my RPD/VNC to my desktop at home every now and again, well I guess I could RPD into a VM guest but meh dunno. I would need to tag on a laptop too since mine is very picky about the position it is in 5 year old Gaming laptop with GPU and blow caps
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:25
|
|
|
Really? I was about to vote for Workstation => ESXi, not only for the additional layer of abstraction, very easy to restore after any kind of failure, but also because it lets you work with both environments at once. I think the concern should be more on the learning environment and not on optimization in that case (ie, it's not going to be a 25% difference in CPU use).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Corvettefisher posted:Normally I would say sure but I do like my RPD/VNC to my desktop at home every now and again, well I guess I could RPD into a VM guest but meh dunno. I would need to tag on a laptop too since mine is very picky about the position it is in 5 year old Gaming laptop with GPU and blow caps Then spin up a VM on your server of whatever environment you want? Unless you plan on gaming and such. Edit: I also have other physical machines that I can use, so dedicating it to ESXi was no issue for me.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
Yeah I only have one physical box, which is why I go through workstation, and it makes re installs very simplistic after 60days. I guess with this new job I could afford to buy a nice Asus Laptop and plug it into my monitor. Only games I really play are source, UT2k4 and a few minor ones. I think I will test out performance between Centos=>workstation=>ESXi and bare metal ESXi=>Esxi I also have SSD's so OS overhead on disk is not that big of an issue E:I might just get a cheap as dell optiplex from ebay put 4GB in there and a gpu and move my tower into my bedroom Dilbert As FUCK fucked around with this message at 23:39 on May 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
I can certainly vouch for the Dell Precision T5400 workstations, but it still gets costly for a decent amount of ECC RAM and a pair of processors. You want lots of threads generally but there are some edge cases involving cache performance being the bottleneck (at which point 'bulldozer' style core cramming is pointless).
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 06:09
|
|