Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@jaredbusch said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@tim_g said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
Right, so in this case, instead of that second server, purchase a single server, and spend the extra money on more Windows licenses.
And do what about no backups?
DASs make great backup locations, too, if buying a whole new server doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here?
Direc Attached Storage
yeah, I know was DAS is.. how is that a good place to put a backup, unless it's attached to a different server that's not running the VMs.
I don't understand. How is it not a good place to put the backups? A second server is more complex, expensive, and fragile as a backup target goes.
So it would be acceptable to have one server hosting all you LoB VMs plus a VM running Veeam or something of the like, and the backup data stored on X (DAS, cloud, etc.), correct?
-
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@scottalanmiller said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@jaredbusch said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@tim_g said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
Right, so in this case, instead of that second server, purchase a single server, and spend the extra money on more Windows licenses.
And do what about no backups?
DASs make great backup locations, too, if buying a whole new server doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here?
Direc Attached Storage
yeah, I know was DAS is.. how is that a good place to put a backup, unless it's attached to a different server that's not running the VMs.
I don't understand. How is it not a good place to put the backups? A second server is more complex, expensive, and fragile as a backup target goes.
So it would be acceptable to have one server hosting all you LoB VMs plus a VM running Veeam or something of the like, and the backup data stored on X (DAS, cloud, etc.), correct?
Of course, it's just media. Having the backup software on another machine doesn't do very much in a one server environment.
-
@scottalanmiller I thought as such. This thread made me think about my own environment and what I'm planning for it. As this (doing backups right) is still new territory for me, I wanted a sanity check.
-
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@scottalanmiller I thought as such. This thread made me think about my own environment and what I'm planning for it. As this (doing backups right) is still new territory for me, I wanted a sanity check.
Now if you have multiple servers, this can easily change. But when you have only one, keeping things simple is often best.
-
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
So it would be acceptable to have one server hosting all you LoB VMs plus a VM running Veeam or something of the like, and the backup data stored on X (DAS, cloud, etc.), correct?
For me the, the most important thing is not the location of the vm running Veeam.
I care about where my Veeam repository is, for me, it'll be on the second server. -
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
So it would be acceptable to have one server hosting all you LoB VMs plus a VM running Veeam or something of the like, and the backup data stored on X (DAS, cloud, etc.), correct?
For me the, the most important thing is not the location of the vm running Veeam.
I care about where my Veeam repository is, for me, it'll be on the second server.If the repo is what is important, then the DAS is the most logical place. I'm confused by your priority being one thing, but the result of that priority seemingly being the opposite of what you'd expect given that priority. It's specifically because we assumed that priority that Tim and I mentioned the DAS approach.
-
A DAS is a great option, a second server is more work, but is also a good choice.
You cannot temporarily failover to a second server without SA.
-
Like JB says, nothing against DAS ( @Tim_G & @scottalanmiller like that choice)
I prefer a second server, I'm not saying it's better or worse vs. DAS.edit: At some point in the future, I will probably add a second KVM host.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
- Buy Server 2016 Standard license - use for new DC vm.
- Upgrade Directory Services level from 2008 to 2016.
Why only upgrade the DC? If the DC is the only thing you're going to upgrade, you might consider saving that money and installing linux with SMB instead.
Dash beat me to it.
The lob apps are Windows only & require AD.
Linux SMB provides AD - most things can't tell the difference unless there is a specific feature of AD 2016 the LOB needs.
SMB and AD are unrelated things. SMB is SMB, no matter what platform it is on. I think you are using SMB as a term for AD here?
AD and SMB are things provided.
Whoops I meant SAMBA - not SMB..
-
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
Like JB says, nothing against DAS ( @Tim_G & @scottalanmiller like that choice)
I prefer a second server, I'm not saying it's better or worse vs. DAS.edit: At some point in the future, I will probably add a second KVM host.
When you have crappy backup software, and 11 TB of data that's need to be backed up and/or combed through, you be wishing real quick it was to a DAS attached to that hypervisor, trust me. Nothing worse than a weekly backup that takes 4 days over the network.
-
@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
Like JB says, nothing against DAS ( @Tim_G & @scottalanmiller like that choice)
I prefer a second server, I'm not saying it's better or worse vs. DAS.edit: At some point in the future, I will probably add a second KVM host.
When you have crappy backup software, and 11 TB of data that's need to be backed up and/or combed through, you be wishing real quick it was to a DAS attached to that hypervisor, trust me. Nothing worse than a weekly backup that takes 4 days over the network.
Not my grammar mistakes, it's this crap auto correct. Windows phone was world's better.
-
@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
Like JB says, nothing against DAS ( @Tim_G & @scottalanmiller like that choice)
I prefer a second server, I'm not saying it's better or worse vs. DAS.edit: At some point in the future, I will probably add a second KVM host.
When you have crappy backup software, and 11 TB of data that's need to be backed up and/or combed through, you be wishing real quick it was to a DAS attached to that hypervisor, trust me. Nothing worse than a weekly backup that takes 4 days over the network.
Not my grammar mistakes, it's this crap auto correct. Windows phone was world's better.
Autocorrect of all types sucks, we've proven that enough around here.
-
@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
When you have crappy backup software, and 11 TB of data that's need to be backed up and/or combed through,
Why not switch to a NON-crappy backup software?
you be wishing real quick it was to a DAS attached to that hypervisor, trust me. Nothing worse than a weekly backup that takes 4 days over the network.
You have DAS on every one of your hosts?
-
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@tim_g said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
When you have crappy backup software, and 11 TB of data that's need to be backed up and/or combed through,
Why not switch to a NON-crappy backup software?
you be wishing real quick it was to a DAS attached to that hypervisor, trust me. Nothing worse than a weekly backup that takes 4 days over the network.
You have DAS on every one of your hosts?
In a multi-host setup, you could have a single host with enough storage to be your backup for all the rest.
Though in cases where you have a critical performance need, you might have enough extra storage locally to do fast recovery. -
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
In a multi-host setup, you could have a single host with enough storage to be your backup for all the rest.
Though in cases where you have a critical performance need, you might have enough extra storage locally to do fast recovery.How is that DAS or did you not read the question?
-
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
In a multi-host setup, you could have a single host with enough storage to be your backup for all the rest.
Why would I store my backups on a host that is also being backed up?
-
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
In a multi-host setup, you could have a single host with enough storage to be your backup for all the rest.
Why would I store my backups on a host that is also being backed up?
@Dashrender was not being clear (pretty normal).
One can assume he meant backup everything to the DAS of the one host.
-
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
In a multi-host setup, you could have a single host with enough storage to be your backup for all the rest.
Though in cases where you have a critical performance need, you might have enough extra storage locally to do fast recovery.How is that DAS or did you not read the question?
Because DAS is just local storage (just not inside the chassis) to the backup server.
Having DAS on every VM host would typically be unwarranted. So if you have a multi-host setup, you'd be much more likely to have a dedicated backup server/appliance, which may or may not use DAS instead of internal storage.
-
@jaredbusch said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@Dashrender was not being clear (pretty normal).
One can assume he meant backup everything to the DAS of the one host.
Next time, I'll be sure to read a @Dashrender post multiple times, jk
-
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@scottalanmiller said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008 w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@fateknollogee said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@eddiejennings said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
@dashrender said in Server 2008w Hyper-V infrastructure: needs upgrades!!:
- Buy Server 2016 Standard license - use for new DC vm.
- Upgrade Directory Services level from 2008 to 2016.
Why only upgrade the DC? If the DC is the only thing you're going to upgrade, you might consider saving that money and installing linux with SMB instead.
Dash beat me to it.
The lob apps are Windows only & require AD.
Linux SMB provides AD - most things can't tell the difference unless there is a specific feature of AD 2016 the LOB needs.
SMB and AD are unrelated things. SMB is SMB, no matter what platform it is on. I think you are using SMB as a term for AD here?
AD and SMB are things provided.
Whoops I meant SAMBA - not SMB..
Why do people so often write is SAMBA like it is an acronym instead of Samba like its name?
