RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Steve Burkett]

VMWare's got an interesting white paper out on SQL Server 2005
performance, comparing running on 32 bit and 64 bit OS's, worth a quick
flick through:

 

http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/SQLServerWorkloads.pdf

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 23 July 2008 14:00
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

I have one that is over 6GB with about 75-100 people hitting it, very
heavy usage.  This particular one has been virtualized for 5 years.
We've had issues with it once on performance when we applied an update
from the vendor, they determined that we needed to truncate the DB to
get it smaller, funny thing was, it was really an issue with the way
their update was programmed.  Calls to the database were causing it to
do a full query on all the tables to enumerate the next sequence number.
So the performance issues were not because of virtualization, it was
because of bad programming.Everything else is much smaller (~1GB) in
size with a maximum of 12-20 people using them.

On 7/22/08, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running
in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on
physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some
of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server,
SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  


We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

Good to know. Thanks for the feedback from both of you!

 

 

 

From: Walker, Clay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 9:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Same here but we're running it on MS Virtual Server (Free version).  No
issues. 4 campuses/libraries, ~2300 kids.

 



From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 7:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I've been running Destiny virtualized on ESX for serveral months.  Not a
single issue.

JR

 
 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Walker, Clay]

Same here but we're running it on MS Virtual Server (Free version).  No
issues. 4 campuses/libraries, ~2300 kids.



From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 7:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?


I've been running Destiny virtualized on ESX for serveral months.  Not a
single issue.
JR




From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?



This is Follett's "Destiny" product.

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had
the Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for
about a year with no issues.

 

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? 

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~






-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 








~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Sherry Abercrombie]

I have one that is over 6GB with about 75-100 people hitting it, very heavy
usage.  This particular one has been virtualized for 5 years.  We've had
issues with it once on performance when we applied an update from the
vendor, they determined that we needed to truncate the DB to get it smaller,
funny thing was, it was really an issue with the way their update was
programmed.  Calls to the database were causing it to do a full query on all
the tables to enumerate the next sequence number.  So the performance issues
were not because of virtualization, it was because of bad programming.
Everything else is much smaller (~1GB) in size with a maximum of 12-20
people using them.

On 7/22/08, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
> VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
> issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical
> servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the
> production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a
> POS app etc.
>
>  On 7/22/08, *John Hornbuckle* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
> uses an SQL database (
> http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29>
> .
>
>
>
> We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
> server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
> of the reasons I want to virtualize more.
>
>
>
> If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
> imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
> 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
> wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
> something will run okay on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
> I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
> specifically are you looking at that says this?
>
> We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
> the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
> then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
> 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
> that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
> the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
> good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
> virtualization.
>
> Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
> probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual
> server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how
> Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.
>
>  On 7/22/08, *John Hornbuckle* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John 

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Mike Semon]

Some people have virtualized Exchange just fine and others have had problems
with I/O and performance. We are investigating

the possibility. We chose to keep Lotus Notes on physical boxes because of
this reason.

 

Mike

 

  _  

From: René de Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

If that’s the case then would it be a problem with Exchange? Those databases
are much bigger than 3-5GB.

 

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:26 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We don’t use Vmware ESX for any databases above like 3-5GB, we usually put
them on shared SQL systems, that are hardware and dedicated for SQL only.
Just my recommendation. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505

  _  

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues.
We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers,
but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the production SQL
apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server,
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V
utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School 

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

Microsoft has said that it will support Exchange 2007 running in a Hyper-V 
guest environment. All roles except Unified Messaging.

 

 

 

 

From: René de Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

If that's the case then would it be a problem with Exchange? Those databases 
are much bigger than 3-5GB.

 

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:26 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We don't use Vmware ESX for any databases above like 3-5GB, we usually put them 
on shared SQL systems, that are hardware and dedicated for SQL only. Just my 
recommendation. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Jon Harris]

Yes I know I went to the link John supplied to find out what product he was
referring to and got that.  He later told me it was the "Destiny" product.

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  404 means the url you are referring is not found, check your IIS logs for
> the url and verify that the page you want to look at is truly there.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
>
> Phone: 401-639-3505
>  --
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[René de Haas]

If that's the case then would it be a problem with Exchange? Those databases 
are much bigger than 3-5GB.

 

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:26 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We don't use Vmware ESX for any databases above like 3-5GB, we usually put them 
on shared SQL systems, that are hardware and dedicated for SQL only. Just my 
recommendation. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in 
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues.  
We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers, but 
all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the production SQL apps 
that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It 
uses an SQL database 
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
 
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29>
 .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a 
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one of 
the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't 
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID 1 
or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I wonder, 
what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if something will run 
okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high I/O, 
as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application specifically 
are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken the 
approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work, then 
go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.  99% of 
what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter that, we have 
always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated the requirements 
and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a good candidate for 
virtualization or not a good candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably 
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server, 
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V utilizes 
system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Jesse Rink]

I've been running Destiny virtualized on ESX for serveral months.  Not a
single issue.
JR


  _  

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?



This is Follett's "Destiny" product.

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had the
Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for about a
year with no issues.

 

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? 

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server,
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V
utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~






-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 










~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Steven Peck]

We don't use VMware for any production database.

Before anyone takes off on how 'anything' can be virtualized you
really have to consider your environment.  Will the hardware you have
support your virtual needs?  The biggest single factor we run into is
disk IO to our storage systems causes issues.  Virtualization adds
complexity to your environment.  It is yet another thing to
troubleshoot and point of failure.  Like anything this can be
mitigated.  Do you have the staff/resources to maintain your
environment if you add virtualization to your tools because it does
take resources.  It is worth in most cases this learning curve, but it
is there and you really will want to send someone to class if you can.

There are vendors who do have applications that don't do well.  Most
of these applications are very sensitive to any introduced latency.
Real time communications systems, larger databases, poorly written in
house applications.  Virtualization is not a one size fits all.  Some
of those venders don't want to support it because it adds cost to
support calls.  Others because they haven't tested it yet (for
whatever reason) and still others because they have tested it and it
really doesn't do well when you scale it. It does solve many needs, it
does fit many more then it doesn't but it doesn't fit everything and
often depends on your environment on how much it will solve for you
and whether the added expense is covered by what you save by removing
a physical server and it's attendant support needs.

Steven Peck
http://www.blkmtn.org

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We don't use Vmware ESX for any databases above like 3-5GB, we usually put
> them on shared SQL systems, that are hardware and dedicated for SQL only.
> Just my recommendation.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
>
> Phone: 401-639-3505
>
> 
>
> From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
> VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
> issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical
> servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the
> production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a
> POS app etc.
>
> On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
> uses an SQL database
> (http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).
>
>
>
> We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
> server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
> of the reasons I want to virtualize more.
>
>
>
> If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
> imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
> 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
> wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
> something will run okay on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
> I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
> specifically are you looking at that says this?
>
> We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
> the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
> then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
> 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
> that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
> the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
> good candida

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Louis, Joe]

Ya. That's what we have run into. I can't say thought that I've had a vendor 
say that it doesn't work, as much as they say that it isn't supported. The only 
thing that we've found "didn't work" are apps that require legacy hardware, 
such as voice boards or the likes.

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I suspect that the vendor just doesn't want the added layer of
complexity that comes with VMs. But vendors are going to have to move
past that fear as more and more customers migrate to virtualized
environments.

I'll keep an eye out for JVM apps...





-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world.

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Cameron]

And of course that would be for Puppy Pounding!

 

 

  _  

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Hey at least you aren't afraid to admit it, if I did they lock me up in a
dog kennel for life :-)  Gives new meaning to Dog Pound :-)

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505

  _  

From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

raises hand at "Demented thinkers", and come to think of it, I've answered
to "sick puppy" more than once.

 

  _  

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:29 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Puppy . Sick. Any questions. 

 

Too many Demented thinkers on this list.

 :-)

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505

  _  

From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:25 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

*EWG* is that a polite thing to ask in mixed company?? ROFLMAO!!!

 

 

  _  

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues.
We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers,
but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the production SQL
apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server,
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V
utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows S

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

Hey at least you aren't afraid to admit it, if I did they lock me up in
a dog kennel for life :-)  Gives new meaning to Dog Pound :-)

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

raises hand at "Demented thinkers", and come to think of it, I've
answered to "sick puppy" more than once.

 



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:29 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Puppy ... Sick... Any questions... 

 

Too many Demented thinkers on this list...

 :-)

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:25 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

*EWG* is that a polite thing to ask in mixed company?? ROFLMAO!!!

 

 



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running
in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on
physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some
of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server,
SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Kim Longenbaugh]

raises hand at "Demented thinkers", and come to think of it, I've
answered to "sick puppy" more than once.



From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:29 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?



Puppy ... Sick... Any questions... 

 

Too many Demented thinkers on this list...

 :-)

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:25 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

*EWG* is that a polite thing to ask in mixed company?? ROFLMAO!!!

 

 



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running
in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on
physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some
of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server,
SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

Puppy ... Sick... Any questions... 

 

Too many Demented thinkers on this list...

 :-)

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:25 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

*EWG* is that a polite thing to ask in mixed company?? ROFLMAO!!!

 

 



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running
in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on
physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some
of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server,
SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Cameron]

*EWG* is that a polite thing to ask in mixed company?? ROFLMAO!!!

 

 

  _  

From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues.
We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers,
but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the production SQL
apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20Sc
hool%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server,
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V
utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

We don't use Vmware ESX for any databases above like 3-5GB, we usually
put them on shared SQL systems, that are hardware and dedicated for SQL
only. Just my recommendation. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

 

Dave

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running
in VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on
physical servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some
of the production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server,
SharePoint, a POS app etc.  

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29> .

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[David Lum]

How big are your databases Sherry, and how many folks are hitting them?

Dave

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in 
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no issues.  
We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical servers, but 
all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the production SQL apps 
that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a POS app etc.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It 
uses an SQL database 
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29>.



We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a 
server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one of 
the reasons I want to virtualize more.



If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't 
imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID 1 
or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I wonder, 
what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if something will run 
okay on a virtual server?







From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?



Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high I/O, 
as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application specifically 
are you looking at that says this?

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken the 
approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work, then 
go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.  99% of 
what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter that, we have 
always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated the requirements 
and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a good candidate for 
virtualization or not a good candidate for virtualization.

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably 
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server, 
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V utilizes 
system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us>


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~



--
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke




--
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

404 means the url you are referring is not found, check your IIS logs
for the url and verify that the page you want to look at is truly there.


 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

Yep, 

 

I have had similar situations with vendors, and when you can show them
all the goodies in virtualization from a High availability and
recoverability prespective, there eyes come wide open, and
virtualization is definitely a hot-topic with them, because they know if
they won't support it or can't support it these days they are going to
loose business. 

 

I always love how they say it "won't" work,  but when you prove them
wrong and wrong and wrong again, its just a little fun to have a laugh
on there parts. 

 

I know I always do, 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:34 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Sherry Abercrombie]

We've got about 14 SQL and/or other production database servers running in
VMWare, plus 3 - 4 times that many for Dev/Test environments with no
issues.  We do have our main Siebel production servers running on physical
servers, but all the periphery Siebel apps are virtual.  Some of the
production SQL apps that we have virtual are Project Server, SharePoint, a
POS app etc.


On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
> It uses an SQL database (
> http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)<http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20%282%29.pdf%29>
> .
>
>
>
> We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
> server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
> of the reasons I want to virtualize more.
>
>
>
> If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
> imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
> 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
> wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
> something will run okay on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
> I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
> specifically are you looking at that says this?
>
> We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
> the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
> then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
> 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
> that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
> the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
> good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
> virtualization.
>
> Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
> probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual
> server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how
> Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.
>
> On 7/22/08, *John Hornbuckle* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sherry Abercrombie
>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> Arthur C. Clarke
>
>


-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

I've heard good things about Hyper-V's performance, and the server I'm
running it on is pretty beefy. So hopefully I'll be okay.

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:43 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Sorry not one I am running but if the load is not too heavy SQL 2005
does work in a virtual environment as well.  I have had that
virtuallized for more than a year now.  I will say it runs better on
Hyper-V than it ever did on Virtual Server.

 

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:33 PM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

This is Follett's "Destiny" product.

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had
the Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for
about a year with no issues.

 

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? 

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~






-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Jon Harris]

Sorry not one I am running but if the load is not too heavy SQL 2005 does
work in a virtual environment as well.  I have had that virtuallized for
more than a year now.  I will say it runs better on Hyper-V than it ever did
on Virtual Server.

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:33 PM, John Hornbuckle <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  This is Follett's "Destiny" product.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had the
> Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for about a
> year with no issues.
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out. It
> uses an SQL database (
> http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
> .
>
>
>
> We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
> server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
> of the reasons I want to virtualize more.
>
>
>
> If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
> imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
> 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
> wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
> something will run okay on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
>
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
> I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
> specifically are you looking at that says this?
>
> We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
> the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
> then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
> 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
> that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
> the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
> good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
> virtualization.
>
> Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
> probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual
> server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how
> Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.
>
> On 7/22/08, *John Hornbuckle* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sherry Abercrombie
>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> Arthur C. Clarke
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Sherry Abercrombie]

LOL, EZ, I'm sure we've had similar experiences.  We've actually had a
vendor in from out of state to setup a new version of their software and
when he realized we were going to do it on VMWare he was going to go back
home because he said it wouldn't work, that they hadn't tested it.we
talked him into going forward with the setup and the application worked
flawlessly.  He went back to his office and with the experience he had with
us, made the company look at virtualization as a legitimate, viable
option.

On 7/22/08, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I am on the same sheet of ESX music as Sherry, I was brought up in the
> Virtualization Game the same way.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
>
> Phone: 401-639-3505
>   --
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

This is Follett's "Destiny" product.

 

 

 

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had
the Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for
about a year with no issues.

 

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized? 

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~






-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Jon Harris]

I am getting a 404 on that page what is the name of the product.  I had the
Winnebago card catalogue system running on a virtual machine for about a
year with no issues.

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:25 PM, John Hornbuckle <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
> It uses an SQL database (
> http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf)
> .
>
>
>
> We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on a
> server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware. That's one
> of the reasons I want to virtualize more.
>
>
>
> If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I can't
> imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they require RAID
> 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O activity. But I
> wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to figuring out if
> something will run okay on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
>
>
> Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
> I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
> specifically are you looking at that says this?
>
> We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
> the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
> then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
> 99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
> that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
> the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
> good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
> virtualization.
>
> Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
> probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual
> server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how
> Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.
>
> On 7/22/08, *John Hornbuckle* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sherry Abercrombie
>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> Arthur C. Clarke
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

It's a program to use in school libraries for checking books in and out.
It uses an SQL database
(http://www.fsc.follett.com/_files/fsc/secured/system_requirements/Dest%
20School%20sys%20reqs%2010685A%20PDF%20print%207_08a%20(2).pdf).

 

We're a small district with small schools, and no app we've ever run on
a server has  come anywhere close to fully utilizing the hardware.
That's one of the reasons I want to virtualize more.

 

If the app will run on an XP "server" with a Pentium 4 processor, I
can't imagine that it would be overly demanding. But they do say they
require RAID 1 or 5, so they must be counting on a fair amount of I/O
activity. But I wonder, what exactly is "high" I/O when it comes to
figuring out if something will run okay on a virtual server?

 

 

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?  

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always
taken the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it
doesn't work, then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with
that approach.  99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.
Now to counter that, we have always looked at what the application will
be doing, evaluated the requirements and load, and made the decision on
whether or not it's a good candidate for virtualization or not a good
candidate for virtualization.   

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and
probably will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with
virtual server, first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't
say how Hyper-V utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

I am on the same sheet of ESX music as Sherry, I was brought up in the
Virtualization Game the same way. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA

Phone: 401-639-3505



From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Jon Harris]

Personally I would think a virtual machine running on a virtual machine
would be all kinds of trouble but then what do I know.  :>

Jon

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:12 PM, John Hornbuckle <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I wonder what sort of issues they might have run into, or what I should
> look out for. It seems like most any app should work fine so long as it
> doesn't have unusual hardware requirements...
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:08 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
> Because either A. They have run into issues supporting it or B. They
> don't
> want to support it.
>
> I have a few software apps that say similar and it's really because they
> base the serial # on the computer ID and know that if I vm it I could
> copy
> the image elsewhere and maintain the computer ID and thus have multiple
> copies of it. That's just my best guess though.
>
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

I agree, and you are going to have to prove to them as we have had to
over and over there really isnt a difference between the OS on Virtual
land and the Physical world which is where there application works in.
The only time we have has to revert is systems that where higher Java
dependent and ran like DOG's in VM environment, once on physical worked
perfectly normal. And I got 300+ VM servers in production. 

The trick we use is we don't even tell them they are on a VM, just give
them RDP access and tell them to set it up. 

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I suspect that the vendor just doesn't want the added layer of
complexity that comes with VMs. But vendors are going to have to move
past that fear as more and more customers migrate to virtualized
environments.

I'll keep an eye out for JVM apps...





-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world. 

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Andy Shook]

I didn't know you could count that high. :) 

Shook
-Original Message-
From: David Lum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:11 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

+1  Times 10.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:01 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world.

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Re: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Sherry Abercrombie]

Why would a product not work on a virtual server, well, one that is high
I/O, as in a database server would possibly not work.  What application
specifically are you looking at that says this?

We've used virtual servers for probably 5 years now, and we've always taken
the approach that we will try it on a virtual server and if it doesn't work,
then go to physical.  So far, we're doing really good with that approach.
99% of what we've tried on a virtual server has worked.  Now to counter
that, we have always looked at what the application will be doing, evaluated
the requirements and load, and made the decision on whether or not it's a
good candidate for virtualization or not a good candidate for
virtualization.

Now with that said, I do have a caveat, I've never used Hyper-V and probably
will never use it, we've been VMWare since we started with virtual server,
first GSX now the latest release of ESX.  So, I can't say how Hyper-V
utilizes system resources compared to ESX.

On 7/22/08, John Hornbuckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
> software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
> says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.
>
> Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
> Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
> storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
> Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
> 2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
> OS).
>
> As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
> playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
> missing something.
>
> Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>



-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

I wonder what sort of issues they might have run into, or what I should
look out for. It seems like most any app should work fine so long as it
doesn't have unusual hardware requirements...




-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Because either A. They have run into issues supporting it or B. They
don't
want to support it.

I have a few software apps that say similar and it's really because they
base the serial # on the computer ID and know that if I vm it I could
copy
the image elsewhere and maintain the computer ID and thus have multiple
copies of it. That's just my best guess though. 



-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[David Lum]

+1  Times 10.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:01 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world.

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[John Hornbuckle]

I suspect that the vendor just doesn't want the added layer of
complexity that comes with VMs. But vendors are going to have to move
past that fear as more and more customers migrate to virtualized
environments.

I'll keep an eye out for JVM apps...





-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world. 

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

Because either A. They have run into issues supporting it or B. They don't
want to support it.

I have a few software apps that say similar and it's really because they
base the serial # on the computer ID and know that if I vm it I could copy
the image elsewhere and maintain the computer ID and thus have multiple
copies of it. That's just my best guess though. 



-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

[Ziots, Edward]

Its probably because the vendor doesn't know anything about VM's, and
wants it on physical hardware, either that or it probably runs JVM which
notoriously doesn't work all that well with VM's I know this well from
te ESX world. 

Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA
Phone: 401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Will it *really* not work virtualized?

I was looking over the system requirements for a particular piece of
software we're looking at purchasing, and I noticed that it specifically
says it has to be on a physical (non-virtual) machine.

Now, this software doesn't have any special hardware requirements.
Processor requirements are modest, as are requirements for RAM and
storage space. And yet, the requirements explicitly say, "Microsoft
Windows Server 2008 Standard or Enterprise without Hyper-V" (if Server
2008 is the OS--it also supports Server 2003, XP, or Vista as the server
OS).

As I've mentioned before, I'm brand new to server virtualization. I'm
playing with Hyper-V right now for the first time. So, I'm sure I'm
missing something.

Why, exactly, would a product like this not work on a virtual server?




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~