That was my theory /thought process as well, however, I was reading an article on sql and hyper-V (yes I know sql is not exchange but it emphasizes using seperate VHDs)
"For a high-performance production virtual SQL Server instance, it's important that you put your OS files, data files, and log files on different VHDs or pass-through disks" It was this that prompted me to ask about exchange, From: charles.sulliva...@bc.edu Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 02:04:21 -0400 Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] Log Files & DB on HyperV To: ntsys...@lists.myitforum.com I’ll be interested in seeing what others have to say, but to me if the VMDKs live on the same physical data store it won’t make any difference. Even if you put them on separate data stores which have VMDKs from other VMs with high IO, that may be just as bad or worse. At VMworld last year I asked someone from VMware and he leaned toward that theory. From: listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of J- P Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2015 1:08 PM To: NT; excha...@lists.myitforum.com Subject: [NTSysADM] Log Files & DB on HyperV Hi all, I'm cross-posting this because despite it being for Exchange, it does pertain Windows as well. Back in the physical days , it was always OS, LogFiles, and DB on separate disks/volumes/arrays etc.. Now with virtulization, is it still recommended /best practice to create separate VHD's for the OS/DB/Log files for performance gain? TIA
