I thought of that, but I am not a big fan of resource pools.
That's interesting because of ALL the things ESX does, pools are my absolute favorite you can do a lot with pools. Even monitor pools by a group for performance, permissions, restrictions, segregation, ease of management.. this list goes on..
Pools are the BEST thing about ESX as a whole in my opinion, I think you are missing a very crucial feature.
no, not that I am aware of. You may get that functionality out of VMware vCenter Lifecycle Manager
Checked out the docs and it doesn't do it.
check out vControl then, otherwise I'm out of ideas
Read the docs and I don't think that one can do it either. Besides, I want to stick to first party software and not third party software. For a feature so simple, I'm sure it's in one of vmwares products.
If you want to stay within the VMware Product Suite, then you're probably out of luck. I'd say talk to your sales rep or TAM and see if they may have heard of the feature you're looking for.
Also, file a feature request for future consideration
Yes, pools. Create limits on the pool, so essentially the VM's they create are only getting resources defined by the pool.. so he can create 100 VM's, but realistically only 5 VM's can run effectively, until they power off the others.
That's how you can do it.. It's not perfect, but that's what pools are for.
I thought of that, but I am not a big fan of resource pools. Seems to me to be more of a headache then a help. If the OP is looking for this workaround, I suppose that will do, but.....
We tried that but to squeeze more powered on vms out of the limited resources we assigned our sub-admins, they use tiny linux vms that take less then half a gig of ram and less then 1gb of hd. The limit to the total number of powered on vms on a system is around 300 something and we are already at 289.
The limit to the total number of powered on vms on a system is around 300 something and we are already at 289.
OK, so skip the software, sounds like you have a case for policies and procedures, if your ESX is at the hard limit, and they continue to deploy VM's despite warnings, then this becomes a management issue.
Someone in authority needs to make them feel the pain, you get 20 VM's of which only 5 can be powered on. If you power on 6, you get a written warning, you go over again, it's an HR meeting. One more infraction, and you can update your resume.
Sounds harsh, but if it's REALLY that critical, it's what I always say EDUCATE the users. That's all it takes.
I thought of that, but I am not a big fan of resource pools.
That's interesting because of ALL the things ESX does, pools are my absolute favorite you can do a lot with pools. Even monitor pools by a group for performance, permissions, restrictions, segregation, ease of management.. this list goes on..
Pools are the BEST thing about ESX as a whole in my opinion, I think you are missing a very crucial feature.
I think for us, we NEVER over commit any resources, so we just use DRS as our pool and give all VM's what they need. Don't get me wrong, resource pools can be a good thing, if used properly, but they can also spawn off into an administrative nightmare.
We have given warnings etc etc and my supervisor is there supervisor but because there in remote locations around the country and they have so much admin ego, they feel the need to have more vms then they should. One admin in particular has 4 vms that host file sharing instead of one vm that does file sharing with group level access. We've gone down the PR path and we're sick of it. A simple powered on vm restriction would be the absolue bees knees instead of being admin babysitters.
p.s. Resource pools are the best thing since sliced bread. I love them. They where the main reason why we moved to a vmware solution in the first place. The ability to restict resources and permissions to a single logical container is fantastic. The ability to put other containers in that container...priceless.
I submitted a feature request.