VMware

This Question is Answered

1 2 Previous Next 24 Replies Last post: Jun 11, 2008 11:16 AM by williamarrata   Go to original post
Click to view oreeh's profile Guru 9,872 posts since
Nov 30, 2005
* If they're "who cares if they're up", then load 'em up!
If they are of that type they shouldn't reside on an ESX host and take up precious SAN space...
Click to view williambishop's profile Master 1,157 posts since
Mar 9, 2006
Unless you're running VDI. There not critical, but they need the performance of a san.
Click to view oreeh's profile Guru 9,872 posts since
Nov 30, 2005
I would assume that VDI VMs are not of the "who cares" type.
If they are there's something going wrong and someone unnecessarily spent a lot of money :D
Click to view williambishop's profile Master 1,157 posts since
Mar 9, 2006
I think you are missing the point. Do I care if I lose 15 or 20 vm's? Not really, I have a couple thousand. They are in fact not even worth backing up. I can stand to lose a fair amount of them. But I believe I would be hard pressed to run that many on local storage. As with everything, IT VARIES. You cannot ever take a rule and apply it to everything.
Click to view oreeh's profile Guru 9,872 posts since
Nov 30, 2005
When we are speaking about thousands of VDI VMs I wouldn't care about a few either.
Click to view adolopo's profile Hot Shot 133 posts since
Jul 14, 2006

For this, I think a better question would be: "How many VMs would you DARE run per core", and this is assuming you have no constraints with purchasing/provisioning memory for that given host(s).

But when it comes down to it, it really is a question of how will your infrastructure implementation (from the ground up) affect you later on down the road. Go with blades and a high number of HOSTs? Or go with a low number of HOST's and beefy machines (DL58x). For my experience, I'd have to say I prefer the smaller approach, as migrating 20 sessions off a HOST is (obviously) less of an event then getting say 60 or 70. Some people may say the less HOST's you have to manage the better, but when you reach a certain amount of VM's within a cluster, the differences (HOST-wise) is negligible.


Click to view williambishop's profile Master 1,157 posts since
Mar 9, 2006
Wow, that's some slow migration. I generally load 50+ and it takes about 10 minutes to vmotion them off when I go into maitenance. Sometimes one will stick, but it's unusal. As has been said numerous times, you'll have to find the number that is right for your environment. There is only to try and find out, a testing phase, which should always be done in any case.
Click to view Natiboy's profile Enthusiast 31 posts since
Jun 8, 2006
I measure a host load (Double Dog Dare) by the number of vCPU's , Memory Allocation, and disk usage. In a large cluster you can't see it as a vm or per host ratio . There are too many variables for consideration.

We measure vCPU assigned per Core and Memory per VM as a primary measure. If all VM guests were the same size you would get a conistent number for every host; but VM's are not the same.


Here is our concept: The VMU (VM Unit) -- Our Current VMU is 1vCPU, 1GB Ram, 100Mb nic, 20GB disk


We provision production servers 2:1 vCPU per core and Non-Prod 5:1 vCPU per core. On a 4 Socket / 4 Core with 64 GB of RAM I would expect that we could load 32 VMU's (Production) or 64 VMU's (Non-Prod) in a raw calculation.


We do however plan for a cluster failover and consider only 90% of the RAM avaliable for actual VM usage. Therefore, we would only plan for 57 VMU's on that size host for a Non-Prod configuration.

Every VM Created gets allocated a certain number of VMU's. This creates a level playing field for the different size VM's and the Hosts they are capable of running on. As stated above a single VMU would be 1,1,20.


2 VMU - 2vCPU -or- 2GB Ram -or- 40GB disk on a same size server as above would yield 16 VMU's of production status.


4VMU - 4vCPU -or- 4GB RAM -or- 80 GB Disk on a same size server as above would yield 8 VMU's of production status.


Now we take the VM Request, calculate the VMU and can allocate the VM load accordingly to the right sized farm.

Its not perfect but keeps some sense in the madness. And allows you to control the 'VM's are Cheap' comment by saying, " Sure 1 VMU is cheap, but you just asked for 24 VMU's in that project"

Click to view williamarrata's profile Expert 500 posts since
Jul 19, 2006

You Know,

I have not heard anyone talking about the GREEN DATA CENTER at all. VMWare and many electric companies are working together in giving rebates to companies that creat Greener Data Centers. I have reduced a count so far of over 200 physical servers. That means, turning off and pulling 200 physical server.

Our Company works with the local Edison company that gave us a large refund check for this. I hope you are all taking advantage of this and contacting your local Electric providor at your data center and finding out if you can qualify for this rebate.

So my responce to this would be to reduce your physical count as much as possible, make sure you build your hosts in your clusters so that HA can handle the lost host in the cluster.

Hope that helped. :-)

VMware Developer

SDKs, APIs, Videos, Learn and much more in the Developer community.

Learn More

Developer Sample Code

Increase your developer productivity with VMware API sample code.

Learn More

VMworld Sessions & Labs

Online access to the latest VMworld Sessions & Labs and online services.

Learn more

Purchase PSO Credits Online

Purchase credits to redeem training and consulting services online.

Buy Now

Community Hardware Software

View reported configurations or report your own.

Learn More

VMware vSphere

Come witness the next giant leap in virtualization.

Register Today

Communities