ASP Developer Network - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com

ASPDeveloper

ASPDeveloper.Net / VirtualServerFAQ.COM

Make sure you go to our home page for:

* Virtual Server 2005 FAQ
* ASP.Net 2.0 Information
* ASP.Net 2.0 Streaming Tutorials
* ASP.Net 2.0 HTML based Tutorials

Made possible by Business Internet Technology Shop (BitShop)

Virtual Server 2005

Recent Virtual Server 2005 posts

* could not see the virtual network adaptor in the Virtual machine
* TFS on Virtual Server 2005 R2
* Virtual Server 2008, need intergrated components?
* Confusing NIC situation
* Hyper-V Network Packet Captures
* Migration from physical host to VM
* Virtual Server 2005 - how to resize (shrink) a fixed vhd file
* Unable to add local Hyper-V server as "host" in MS SCVMM 2008
* Windows 7 and virtualization
* Virtual server 2005 r2 sp1 hard blocked on Server 2008 R2
* Virtual infrastructure...
* Hyper-V on Core with R2
* Disabling Creation of Service Connections Points in AD
* Windows 7 on Hyper-V
* Hi Fat lady it"s your chance
* Fix: Integration Services Lost During Virtual Server->Hyper-V Migration
* automatic stop action
* Snapshot error on Hyper-V
* Hyper-V snapshot problem
* What is Hyper-V Server?

Add Solution

Hyper-V without SAN

Source: microsoft.public.virtualserver
Sent: 08/17/2009
From: "Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

Hello,

We are planning to migrate to MS Server 2008 platform and take advantage of
virtualization and failover clustering. The two primary server applications
we want to virtualize into a highly available cluster are Exchange 2010 and
ISA 2006. Although we plan on using four physical servers to accomplish
failover, some research shows that storage for the VM's needs to be shared
on a common external storage array.

For example, to virtualize Exchange server using two physical machines (each
with internal HD storage), do you have to have a separate external shared
storage or SAN to have both Exchange servers operate in a failover cluster?
Can we logically share storage using the server's internal HD?

Any help would be appreciated.

Regards,
Curtis

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Related Messages

Re: Hyper-V without SAN

Sent: 08/17/2009
From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

I've used Starwind's iSCSI software with good success to build a failover
cluster. I've used it on a base of 32-bit Windows Server 2k3, and a 64-bit
Windows Server 2k8. Both worked well, though the 2k8 was faster. But the
underlying hardware was faster, so that's not surprising.
http://www.starwindsoftware.com/, and they have good step-by-step
walkthroughs that make the whole thing quite simple, really.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...

Show quoted text

> Hello,
>
> We are planning to migrate to MS Server 2008 platform and take advantage
> of virtualization and failover clustering. The two primary server
> applications we want to virtualize into a highly available cluster are
> Exchange 2010 and ISA 2006. Although we plan on using four physical
> servers to accomplish failover, some research shows that storage for the
> VM's needs to be shared on a common external storage array.
>
> For example, to virtualize Exchange server using two physical machines
> (each with internal HD storage), do you have to have a separate external
> shared storage or SAN to have both Exchange servers operate in a failover
> cluster? Can we logically share storage using the server's internal HD?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Curtis
>
>
>
>

Re: Hyper-V without SAN

Sent: 08/18/2009
From: "Steve Buckley" <mrnecros(remove-this)@hotmail.com>
Message:

Currently Hyper-V does not support SCSI-3 persistant reservations on it's
virtual SCSI devices so you can't use them for a "cluster in a box" on 2008.
However any current hardware SCSI device (i.e. 2 or more controllers
attached to a bunch of disks in some way or another) will work fine.
Also iSCSI software like StarWind can be run on the local machine if you
want to use non-SCSI disks (this is what I'm doing.)
Anoying but not the end of the world.

"Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...

Show quoted text

Re: Hyper-V without SAN

Sent: 08/24/2009
From: daveberm <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

On Aug 17, 6:11=A0pm, "Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)>
wrote:
of
ns
nd
h
d
ach
r?

iSCSI targets are one solution, however, if you are going to the
trouble of making your servers highly availble, shouldn't you also
make you storage highly available? You should look into host based
replication solutions such as SteelEye DataKeeper Cluster Edition that
will allow you to use your internal storage in a WSFC cluster and
simply keep the local disk in sync across your network. This
configuration has two benefits: it eliminates the shared storage as a
single point of failure and it also allows you to make use of the
local attached storage you already have in your servers.

Here is a video demonstration of DataKeeper and Windows Server
Failover Clustering working together to cluster Hyper-V VMs without
the need for shared storage.

http://www.steeleye.com/downloads/videos/datakeeper-and-hyper-v-wsfc/index.=
html

You can request a 30-day evaluation at http://www.steeleye.com/eval/

Show quoted text

> Hello,
>
> We are planning to migrate to MS Server 2008 platform and take advantage =
> virtualization and failover clustering. The two primary server applicatio=
> we want to virtualize into a highly available cluster are Exchange 2010 a=
> ISA 2006. =A0Although we plan on using four physical servers to accomplis=
> failover, some research shows that storage for the VM's needs to be share=
> on a common external storage array.
>
> For example, to virtualize Exchange server using two physical machines (e=
> with internal HD storage), do you have to have a separate external shared
> storage or SAN to have both Exchange servers operate in a failover cluste=
> Can we logically share storage using the server's internal HD?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Curtis

Re: Hyper-V without SAN

Sent: 08/26/2009
From: "Steve Buckley" <mrnecros(remove-this)@hotmail.com>
Message:

StarWind Enterprise Edition also has all these features and runs on Server
2008 Core which presents an interesting situation;
It is now possible to build a fully functional enterprise class SAN using
off-the-shelf products and Windows for a fraction of the price of an EMC
Clarion!

"daveberm" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
On Aug 17, 6:11 pm, "Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)>
wrote:

iSCSI targets are one solution, however, if you are going to the
trouble of making your servers highly availble, shouldn't you also
make you storage highly available? You should look into host based
replication solutions such as SteelEye DataKeeper Cluster Edition that
will allow you to use your internal storage in a WSFC cluster and
simply keep the local disk in sync across your network. This
configuration has two benefits: it eliminates the shared storage as a
single point of failure and it also allows you to make use of the
local attached storage you already have in your servers.

Here is a video demonstration of DataKeeper and Windows Server
Failover Clustering working together to cluster Hyper-V VMs without
the need for shared storage.

http://www.steeleye.com/downloads/videos/datakeeper-and-hyper-v-wsfc/index.html

You can request a 30-day evaluation at http://www.steeleye.com/eval/

Show quoted text

> Hello,
>
> We are planning to migrate to MS Server 2008 platform and take advantage
> of
> virtualization and failover clustering. The two primary server
> applications
> we want to virtualize into a highly available cluster are Exchange 2010
> and
> ISA 2006. Although we plan on using four physical servers to accomplish
> failover, some research shows that storage for the VM's needs to be shared
> on a common external storage array.
>
> For example, to virtualize Exchange server using two physical machines
> (each
> with internal HD storage), do you have to have a separate external shared
> storage or SAN to have both Exchange servers operate in a failover
> cluster?
> Can we logically share storage using the server's internal HD?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Curtis

Re: Hyper-V without SAN

Sent: 08/28/2009
From: daveberm <(email address - cut out)>
Message:

On Aug 25, 7:21=A0pm, "Steve Buckley" <mrnecros(remove-this)
@hotmail.com> wrote:
r
e
red
ed
quoted text -

Here is my blog post that talks about some things to consider to when
deploying iSCSI storage for high availability clusters.

http://clusteringformeremortals.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/you-are-the-weakes=
t-link-goodbye/

Show quoted text

> StarWind Enterprise Edition also has all these features and runs on Serve=
> 2008 Core which presents an interesting situation;
> It is now possible to build a fully functional enterprise class SAN using
> off-the-shelf products and Windows for a fraction of the price of an EMC
> Clarion!
>
> "daveberm" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>
> news:(email address - cut out)...
> On Aug 17, 6:11 pm, "Curtis Brown" <(email address - cut out)>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello,
>
> > We are planning to migrate to MS Server 2008 platform and take advantag=
> > of
> > virtualization and failover clustering. The two primary server
> > applications
> > we want to virtualize into a highly available cluster are Exchange 2010
> > and
> > ISA 2006. Although we plan on using four physical servers to accomplish
> > failover, some research shows that storage for the VM's needs to be sha=
> > on a common external storage array.
>
> > For example, to virtualize Exchange server using two physical machines
> > (each
> > with internal HD storage), do you have to have a separate external shar=
> > storage or SAN to have both Exchange servers operate in a failover
> > cluster?
> > Can we logically share storage using the server's internal HD?
>
> > Any help would be appreciated.
>
> > Regards,
> > Curtis
>
> iSCSI targets are one solution, however, if you are going to the
> trouble of making your servers highly availble, shouldn't you also
> make you storage highly available? =A0You should look into host based
> replication solutions such as SteelEye DataKeeper Cluster Edition that
> will allow you to use your internal storage in a WSFC cluster and
> simply keep the local disk in sync across your network. =A0This
> configuration has two benefits: it eliminates the shared storage as a
> single point of failure and it also allows you to make use of the
> local attached storage you already have in your servers.
>
> Here is a video demonstration of DataKeeper and Windows Server
> Failover Clustering working together to cluster Hyper-V VMs without
> the need for shared storage.
>
> http://www.steeleye.com/downloads/videos/datakeeper-and-hyper-v-wsfc/...
>
> You can request a 30-day evaluation athttp://www.steeleye.com/eval/- Hide=
>
> - Show quoted text -

Post Reply | This is Spam! | Mark as Spam

Other groups

Virtual PC (Mac)(3592)	Virtual PC(12844)	Virtual PC (French)(496)
Virtual Server 2005(6245)

Our Sponsors

Virtual Server 2005 Info Here!
http://www.aspdeveloper.net

Wiki

Blogs

Articles

Image galleries

File galleries

Forums

Maps

Directories

ASP Developer Network (since 1996) - Brought to you by Steve Radich and BitShop, Inc. - http://www.bitshop.com
Copyright © 1997-2005 by BitShop, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
No content may be reproduced in any form without written permission from BitShop, Inc.
We will be honored to assist with reproduction rights on our material if you contact us.
We also can provide print articles for your magazine, private training seminars at your site, and conference presentations.
Thank you for visiting. Please bookmark our site if you found it useful!
If you wish to make a donation it will help further the development of these free resources: