Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
rav3n0u5
Yak Posting Veteran
88 Posts |
 Posted - 2006-09-21 : 20:57:08
|
| This might be kind of abstract... has anyone had experience with MS SQL on a Virtual Machine (preferably ESX, but any other virtual platform would work)? Did you experience any performance issues? Did you have to modify the configuration heavily to get it to perform? Did you swear it off?I set it up at the request of my boss in a production environment, and I think I am having some regrets. I just wanted to know if anyone had tried this? |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-21 : 21:10:44
|
| We've got a lot of experience here with this type of environment. And yes we use ESX. One of the potential issues is performance. Each VM slice can have 2GB or maybe it's 4GB of RAM. That can be rather limiting to SQL Server, especially for a database that is over 5GB in size. Eyechart will probably come along with some more information. He's got some that are clustered.Tara Kizer |
 |
|
|
rav3n0u5
Yak Posting Veteran
88 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-21 : 21:21:30
|
| Yeah, the limit is something odd - i think right in between 2 and 4 for Ram. I didn't realize the configuration could be as robust as clustering. That gives me some hope. Do you have them as dual proc machines? SCSI vs IDE? |
|
|
|
TRACEYSQL
Aged Yak Warrior
594 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-24 : 10:39:55
|
| We had an odd thing with virtual sql the other day nothing was running but it kept reporting 100% cpu used ...they kept blaming me as im the sql dba...im like nothing is running then gave it back to the network guy...never did resolve it... |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-25 : 10:18:00
|
| VMs can be very, very slow if not configured properly or if insufficient hardware is used.Tara Kizer |
|
|
|
rav3n0u5
Yak Posting Veteran
88 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-25 : 14:25:15
|
| Curious, do you use a SAN or local storage? |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-25 : 14:29:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by rav3n0u5
Curious, do you use a SAN or local storage?
Local storage on the ones that I support, but I believe other SQL Servers here on VMs use a SAN (or some other network storage).Tara Kizer |
|
|
|
eyechart
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
3575 Posts |
Posted - 2006-09-25 : 20:24:04
|
| I have a lot of experience with SQL running on VMs. Here is my recomendation:1. do no use large amounts of memory for your VM. Use only the amount needed. I do not allocate more than 1.5GB per VM now. If you need a bigger box, go with physical hardware. This is because of the way the balloon driver works in ESX server. Do some searching in VMware KB for information.2. Do not use dual cpu in your VM. The way VMware handles VMs that have dual CPUs can cause performance problems. There are articles in the VMware KB about this.3. Do not install more than one SQL instance per VM. If you need another instance, stand up another VM instead and install it there. This allows you to have more granular control over your resources, especially if you haver a VMware server farm and can vmotion your VMs from one machine to the next for load balancing purposes.These recommendations are for ESX 2.5 and older. Version 3 adds some new features, but I have not yet gotten my hands on a VM running in that environment.Also, Use of SAN disk is essnetial for VMware as this allows you to use farms (essentially vmware clustering) and makes for easy failover of a virtual machine if physical hardware fails.-ec |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SQL on a Virtual Machine?