Help choosing replacement Hyper-V host machines and connected storage
-
I'm in the process of putting together a proposal to redo our Hyper-V environment. The many different combinations and countless options are making my head spin. I could really use some help choosing the right hardware.
Goals
- Replace old, inefficient servers
- Reduce energy consumption, overall BTU and corresponding cooling requirements
- Reduce number of physical servers
- Proposed solution to have 3 - 4 year lifespan.
Needs
Two (2) Hyper-V Host Machines (Windows Server 2012 R2)- Replication between servers in the event of host server failure
- Load Balancing
- Storage
- Hyper-V client machines (12TB - 14TB)
- File server (2TB)
Hyper-V VMs
-
Windows Server 2012 R2
- SQL 2005 (850GB)
- SQL 2008 R2 (1TB)
- SQL 2012 (1TB)
- SQL 2014 (500GB - will increase as migrations occur)
- Oracle 11g (850GB - 1TB)
- Oracle 12c (750GB)
- Webserver (100GB)
- App Services Server 01 (100GB)
- App Services Server 02 (100GB)
-
Windows 7 x64
- Win7 Development 01 (60-80GB)
- Win7 Development 02 (60-80GB)
- Win7 Development 03 (60-80GB)
- Win7 RDP Client 01 (60GB)
- Win7 RDP Client 02 (60GB)
- Win7 RDP Client 03 (60GB)
- Win7 RDP Client 04 (60GB)
-
Windows XP x86
- XP Client 01 (60GB)
- XP Client 02 (20GB)
- XP Client 03 (20GB)
- XP Client 04 (60GB)
Due to our size and budget constraints we purchase refurbished equipment, which are typically 2-3 years old. Whichever solution I end up with needs to last 3-4 additional years.
As far as connectivity is concerned I would probably use 10GbE between the Hyper-V host servers and the storage.
I apologize in advance for any details I have left out. I really do appreciate your assistance. Thanks everyone!
-
What are you doing for storage for your VMs now?
-
You should look into the solutions from Scale. It's pretty much exactly what you want without the complexity.
-
@dafyre said:
What are you doing for storage for your VMs now?
{Correction made 19 OCT -- I referenced wrong server.} I'm using local storage from two Dell R900 servers. Host01 only has 865GB available for VMs, while Host02 has 2,786GB available.
-
You said you have budget restrictions... how bad are they?
-
@AVI-NetworkGuy said:
You should look into the solutions from Scale. It's pretty much exactly what you want without the complexity.
I'm not familiar with them. Can you provide some details?
-
I'd definitely recommend reaching out to the Scale Computing guys (are there any on here?) here or either on SW. For information about pricing. It would be new kit and would last you several years. I think they can do 2 node setups as well.
-
@Minion-Queen said:
You said you have budget restrictions... how bad are they?
That's the fun part; I'm not given a true budget, but knowing how tight the pursestrings are $12-13k would be the max.
-
@dafyre said:
I'd definitely recommend reaching out to the Scale Computing guys (are there any on here?) here or either on SW. For information about pricing. It would be new kit and would last you several years. I think they can do 2 node setups as well.
Thanks, I'll check them out.
-
NTG can help with the Scale questions so ask away!
-
Secondary suggestion if Scale isn't what you need is Xbyte: @ryan-from-xbyte and @LEzell can help ask questions for Xbyte.
-
That's right! I forgot you guys are Scale partners (that the right word?) now!
-
Yup we are. We well I guess, I am still learning about them. But I know @scottalanmiller knows a ton and @art_of_shred does as well.
-
@AVI-NetworkGuy said:
You should look into the solutions from Scale. It's pretty much exactly what you want without the complexity.
I was literally on the phone with Scale when this thread popped up. Pinging them back now.
-
-
Again I am learning still
but I think we will get a few Scale people in here answering questions for ya soon. -
@JohnFromSTL said:
- Replication between servers in the event of host server failure
- Load Balancing
- Storage
- Hyper-V client machines (12TB - 14TB)
As far as connectivity is concerned I would probably use 10GbE between the Hyper-V host servers and the storage.
With only two nodes, shared storage should not come up as an option. There is both no way to afford it and it would defeat any value in having two of these nodes. Your budget doesn't allow for this option. The starting point for something like that would be an EMC VNX to be reliable enough to even slightly consider having two nodes.
As I see it, your choices are going down to a single server or going to two servers and using replicated local storage. Even that will be tough, but external shared storage both doesn't meet your goals not fit in your budget.
-
@JohnFromSTL said:
Due to our size and budget constraints we purchase refurbished equipment, which are typically 2-3 years old. Whichever solution I end up with needs to last 3-4 additional years.
Refurb is good. @xByteSean is around to help out with that. As is @ryan-from-xbyte
-
Dell PowerEdge R910 are monster servers but lack a lot of storage options. How is your CPU utilization? That is going to be the killer as those are quad processor systems. So even though they are two generations old, they are twice the size of normal servers. You are going to be looking at the Dell R730xd loaded to get the storage and the CPU that you need to come in around where you were before. That's not going to be possible, I don't think, in your price envelope.
-
Xbyte has a lot of great options for you and some great warranties to go with them.
