Guest Barkingdog Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 ** If this is posted to the wrong newsgroup, excuse me, and please direct me to the proper one.*** We have over 80 Windows servers at our place of business and about 400 workers! Big time consolidation needed. Some here want to consolidate as many apps as possible on a single physical server. That bothers me because none of the apps (3rd party and internally developed ones) were tested in an environment with the other apps present. When we install them together on a single server we are, effectively, testing this mix for the first time. Questions come to mind: other than obvious problems, e.g. BSOD, how do we know if something was broken? (I don’t think we have regression tests for the individual apps to see the impact of putting them together.). And how do we truely roll back a bad "apple"? Our developers prefer physical servers (over virtual machines) for their dev\stage\prod environment. We could have 3 clusters for them. For 3rd party apps I prefer to put each one in its own VM for isolation. And then stuff as many of the VM’s as possible on a massive clustered server. (Better VM’s than physical, space-occupying, power-sucking, servers. But this does not help the Administration side at all.) What are you thoughts on this matter of consolidation? TIA,
Guest Danny Sanders Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Re: Server "consolidation" I would suggest talking with HP. They came out here and set up their server and monitored our network for about a month. Then they cam back with a detailed report as to what resources each server was using as far as processor, memory disk space, etc.. This would eliminate the BSOD due to resource conflicts. Then they worked out which servers can be eliminated, which can be combined, and even what type of host server we should use to host the virtual servers. hth DDS "Barkingdog" <Barkingdog@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:2C8AE6C8-3FA8-425D-A7FB-6313F63699A5@microsoft.com... > ** If this is posted to the wrong newsgroup, excuse me, and please direct > me > to the proper one.*** > > We have over 80 Windows servers at our place of business and about 400 > workers! Big time consolidation needed. Some here want to consolidate as > many > apps as possible on a single physical server. That bothers me because none > of > the apps (3rd party and internally developed ones) were tested in an > environment with the other apps present. When we install them together on > a > single server we are, effectively, testing this mix for the first time. > Questions come to mind: other than obvious problems, e.g. BSOD, how do we > know if something was broken? (I don't think we have regression tests for > the > individual apps to see the impact of putting them together.). And how do > we > truely roll back a bad "apple"? > > Our developers prefer physical servers (over virtual machines) for their > dev\stage\prod environment. We could have 3 clusters for them. For 3rd > party > apps I prefer to put each one in its own VM for isolation. And then stuff > as > many of the VM's as possible on a massive clustered server. (Better VM's > than > physical, space-occupying, power-sucking, servers. But this does not help > the > Administration side at all.) > > What are you thoughts on this matter of consolidation? > > TIA, >
Guest Anthony Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Re: Server "consolidation" That's good advice. Platespin also provide some tools for assessing the workload. VM's create isolation, but they are not a panacea. They suck capacity out of your infrastructure, because a) you need to pay for the base OS to run the VM's and b) you are working through virtual device drivers. They are ideal if the server load is low and the application requires to be isolated. This just means that a unit of VM computing capacity costs a bit more than you think. Anthony, http://www.airdesk.co.uk "Danny Sanders" <DSanders@NOSPAMciber.com> wrote in message news:uOSDM76UIHA.4280@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >I would suggest talking with HP. They came out here and set up their server >and monitored our network for about a month. Then they cam back with a >detailed report as to what resources each server was using as far as >processor, memory disk space, etc.. This would eliminate the BSOD due to >resource conflicts. Then they worked out which servers can be eliminated, >which can be combined, and even what type of host server we should use to >host the virtual servers. > > hth > DDS > > "Barkingdog" <Barkingdog@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:2C8AE6C8-3FA8-425D-A7FB-6313F63699A5@microsoft.com... >> ** If this is posted to the wrong newsgroup, excuse me, and please direct >> me >> to the proper one.*** >> >> We have over 80 Windows servers at our place of business and about 400 >> workers! Big time consolidation needed. Some here want to consolidate as >> many >> apps as possible on a single physical server. That bothers me because >> none of >> the apps (3rd party and internally developed ones) were tested in an >> environment with the other apps present. When we install them together on >> a >> single server we are, effectively, testing this mix for the first time. >> Questions come to mind: other than obvious problems, e.g. BSOD, how do we >> know if something was broken? (I don't think we have regression tests for >> the >> individual apps to see the impact of putting them together.). And how do >> we >> truely roll back a bad "apple"? >> >> Our developers prefer physical servers (over virtual machines) for their >> dev\stage\prod environment. We could have 3 clusters for them. For 3rd >> party >> apps I prefer to put each one in its own VM for isolation. And then stuff >> as >> many of the VM's as possible on a massive clustered server. (Better VM's >> than >> physical, space-occupying, power-sucking, servers. But this does not help >> the >> Administration side at all.) >> >> What are you thoughts on this matter of consolidation? >> >> TIA, >> > >
Recommended Posts