Re: VMWare and iSCSI for Exchange 2007   

Ok. Thanks, all. Much appreciated!

Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],

> I dont want to point the finger anywhere and 64 bit is the wave of the
> future :) I would recommend running it on native hardware because if
> you have a problem support will not really be a great option. If it
> turns out that you are having a driver issue that is related to the
> virtualization software, you are going to be asked to remove exchange
> from vmware and test it on regular hardware.
> 
> Dgoldman
> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
> Download OABInteg
> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A
> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
> "MS Poster"  wrote in message
> news:b3173d71ab4a8ca258839afc8dc@msnews.microsoft.com...
> 
>> Thanks for the feedback from both of you.
>> This was a GSX (or whatever they currently call it) question. Waiting
>> for
>> Longhorn is not an option; this needs to be done in the next 30 days.
>> I
>> assume Longhorn supports 64-bit virtualization? (I am certainly not a
>> Microsoft-basher, but this 64-bit issue is extremely frustrating and
>> is
>> 100% Microsoft's fault.)
>> So, just to be clear: you would recommned running it on native
>> hardware (i.e., no virtualization) and omitting the Edge role? Again,
>> I really only have one box to throw at this. Your concerns with
>> virtualization are: lack of MS support and resource demands by the MB
>> role, correct?
>> 
>> The iSCSI array is an Equallogic PS300e with 14 x 500GB 7200rpm SATA
>> drives and 3Gb connectivitiy to the iSCSI switch.
>> 
>> Many thanks.
>> 
>> Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],
>> 
>>> Your best bet would be to not put it on there or wait for longhorn
>>> server.
>>> 
>>> Dgoldman
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
>>> Download OABInteg
>>> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid
>>> =A
>>> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
>>> "Mark Arnold [MVP]"  wrote in message
>>> news:ku1oo3l4hdls7br48cqimmbe2tkdbc1gf1@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
>>>>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello:
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small
>>>>> Exchange
>>>>> 2007
>>>>> deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server
>>>>> with 8GB
>>>>> of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box.
>>>>> That
>>>>> machine
>>>>> attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general,
>>>>> we like
>>>>> virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>>>>> Questions:
>>>>> - With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on
>>>>> the new
>>>>> machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various
>>>>> roles
>>>>> on
>>>>> different
>>>>> virtual machines?
>>>>> - Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and
>>>>> consolidating
>>>>> all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>>>>> - Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was
>>>>> planning
>>>>> to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as
>>>>> separate
>>>>> LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I
>>>>> really
>>>>> gaining
>>>>> anything by doing this since the host is has only a single
>>>>> connection to
>>>>> the array?
>>>>> Many thanks.
>>>> You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
>>>> putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
>>>> separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one
>>>> of
>>>> support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If
>>>> you're
>>>> not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
>>>> former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
>>>> If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
>>>> the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
>>>> say this is an ESX based question?!?
>>>> The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
>>>> got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor,
>>>> model
>>>> and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.

date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:19:40 +0000 (UTC)   author:   MS Poster