_
> From: Charlie Kaiser [charl...@golden-eagle.org]
> Sent: Saturday, 23 May 2009 5:09 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
>
> You've got an inadequate disk subsystem for what you're trying to do.
> C
AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
You've got an inadequate disk subsystem for what you're trying to do.
Choices...
1. Launch fewer VMs at one time.
2. Add JBOD storage and run one VM per spindle.
3. Add USB drives and run the VMs off of
Saw that
as a recommendation somewhere too.
And yes you can change that without interruption, if it is on a UPS.
-Original Message-
From: jesse-r...@wi.rr.com [mailto:jesse-r...@wi.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 2:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwa
*
Charlie Kaiser
charl...@golden-eagle.org
Kingman, AZ
***
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 1:12 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Performance problem on VM
raid cards and appropriate raid level/disc configs will
yield good results.
jlc
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Kaiser [mailto:charl...@golden-eagle.org]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 1:10 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
You've go
-Original Message-
> From: jesse-r...@wi.rr.com [mailto:jesse-r...@wi.rr.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 11:24 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
>
> Single Array, RAID5, made up of 3 physical disks (thats all
netwerx.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 11:53 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
>
> If that were true, esx would not scale at all. Given good
> hardware you can achieve much more than that. I have had
> upwards of 1
-
From: Charlie Kaiser [mailto:charl...@golden-eagle.org]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
How are the physical drives configured? We usually put no more than one VM
on a spindle. The conflicts between two
PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
Single Array, RAID5, made up of 3 physical disks (thats all we have).
Original Message:
-
From: Charlie Kaiser charl...@golden-eagle.org
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 11:08:22 -0700
To: ntsysadmin@lyr
Single Array, RAID5, made up of 3 physical disks (thats all we have).
Original Message:
-
From: Charlie Kaiser charl...@golden-eagle.org
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 11:08:22 -0700
To: ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: Performance problem on VMwareServer2 - gah
How
How are the physical drives configured? We usually put no more than one VM
on a spindle. The conflicts between two VMs on one spindle produce
unacceptable bottlenecks in my experience.
***
Charlie Kaiser
charl...@golden-eagle.org
Kingman, AZ
***
> -Or
How have you created that array? The P400 isn't the meanest array controller...
If you are running R5 on that array I would expect exactly what you describe.
Especially with vmware server as the guest discs sit on top of the host fs.
I have a couple 380 G5's with a p400 and P800 and both have R10
VMWare Server is not the right tool for the job at all.
You need ESX/ESXi (or Fusion).
VMWare Server is Playskool for VM.
-Original Message-
From: jesse-r...@wi.rr.com [mailto:jesse-r...@wi.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Performance proble
13 matches
Mail list logo
