Decent vmware test server spec

[*JimmyJ*]

Hi Guys,

I'm after a decent vmware server which will be used within in a test environment. The server doesn't need to be stupidly spec'ed, as like i said it will only be used as a test. I want it to run ESXi Vmware 5.0.1.xxxxx (or whatever the latest version). with a total of 6 vm's. 2 windows 2008 R2 servers, 1 Windows 2003 server, and 3 windows 7 clients.

Is there anything anyone can recommend?

 

[dk]

See what the cheapest hp server is on the VMware hcl (hardware compatibility list).

The really cheap ones don't tend to get certified.

 

[ivegota16v]

thought of running server 2012 instead? does everything that ESX can do and a whole lot more at a much much cheaper price!!

 

[ChrisR]

Isn't basic esxi free for the hypervisor, and there isn't an esx product anymore is there?

 

[dk]

thought of running server 2012 instead? does everything that ESX can do and a whole lot more at a much much cheaper price!!

:laugh:

Esxi is free, with one server you aren't going to use any of the features of either product, but the esxi is free. Oh and it's not based on windows, win......

 

[cava83]

Well, when you download 5.1 (latest) same as in every version, you get the full evaluation version with all the features that lasts up to 60 days, which then stops all the fancy features working.

The two best test servers, which are cheap and work well (not for production) are the HP NL40 & the ML110 G7, you will need to upgrade the RAM and additionally, installing an SSD will provide better performance.

For the Price of an ML110 G7, you could get a couple of NL40's, spread the load and test vMotion and so on (there is a £100 cash back per unit, until the end of the month)

If you will be using up to 3 nodes or 6 CPU's, VMware essentials or essentials plus as the best licenses to go for, depending on your requirements.

Thanks,

G.

 

[dk]

I don't believe those servers are certified on 5 or 5.1.

They might work, but wouldn't be supported.

 

[cava83]

I don't believe those servers are certified on 5 or 5.1.

They might work, but wouldn't be supported.

OP said "I'm after a decent vmware server which will be used within in a test environment..........."

Hence why I said "The two best test servers, which are cheap and work well (not for production) ........."'However, I should'nt have said the two best test servers, as there are thousands.(but not cheap)

It appears he only needs it for testing, there are a lot of servers that work, which aren't fully supported on the HCL, which you can use for your proof of concept.

[off topic] Interestingly enough, 5.1 now supports a Mac Pro, which is quite amazing [/off topic]

thanks,

G.

 

[dk]

a lot of times, if they don't appear on VMwares HCL, they actually won't work though, VMware don't exclude them for the fun of it, like i had a customer with a DL180, not a cheap server, but vmware just wouldn't work on it (at the time, i forget the version of vmware and the generation of server). Anything below a 300 series from HP is always going to be dodgy with Vmware product support.

you know how it works, a test server never stays a test server for long, so you need something that can be supported down the line really on the product you are using. The main thing is the component support with drivers, around NIC cards and storage adapters etc.

Trust me, I have a LOT of experience in this field.

 

[dk]

and i can't really see the benefit of it running on a mac pro unless you are using it to demo to people.

 

[cava83]

and i can't really see the benefit of it running on a mac pro unless you are using it to demo to people.

True, quite pointless in a real environment but fun.

 

[cava83]

a lot of times, if they don't appear on VMwares HCL, they actually won't work though, VMware don't exclude them for the fun of it, like i had a customer with a DL180, not a cheap server, but vmware just wouldn't work on it (at the time, i forget the version of vmware and the generation of server). Anything below a 300 series from HP is always going to be dodgy with Vmware product support.

you know how it works, a test server never stays a test server for long, so you need something that can be supported down the line really on the product you are using. The main thing is the component support with drivers, around NIC cards and storage adapters etc.

Trust me, I have a LOT of experience in this field.

Trust me, I mess around a lot too

Again, this is a test environment and many test environments are proof of concepts........

Anyhow, even "real servers" which are on the HCL's can have issues, could be anything but normally the network cards, for instance if they are using broadcom chipsets, sometimes the drivers aren't in the vmware images and you have to compile your own, hence why you get manafacturer specific images such as Dell / HP which have been compiled with those drives



Anyway, DK you work on multi million pound test environments with unlimited budgets for us normal people, we have to play with the cheaper stuff which might not be on the HCL but works (i.e HCL is only normally a real issue if you phone up VMware and they don't help you out because you are not on the HCL.....)

 

[ThomasBrentnall]

http://www.ebuyer.com/338399-hp-proliant-dl165-g7-6274-server-663809-421 This should do everything you need

 

[dk]

Trust me, I mess around a lot too

Again, this is a test environment and many test environments are proof of concepts........

Anyhow, even "real servers" which are on the HCL's can have issues, could be anything but normally the network cards, for instance if they are using broadcom chipsets, sometimes the drivers aren't in the vmware images and you have to compile your own, hence why you get manafacturer specific images such as Dell / HP which have been compiled with those drives



Anyway, DK you work on multi million pound test environments with unlimited budgets for us normal people, we have to play with the cheaper stuff which might not be on the HCL but works (i.e HCL is only normally a real issue if you phone up VMware and they don't help you out because you are not on the HCL.....)

That's a lot of winks!

if its on the hcl, then if something doesn't work, at least VMware will be there to help, if it isn't they they are unlikely to offer any assistance.

oh and I always use the manufacturers image, the image from VMware has been made so small for the footprint no that it doesn't contain all the drivers, so it makes sense to use the manufacturers one, I never download the VMware image personally.

 

[dk]

http://www.ebuyer.com/338399-hp-proliant-dl165-g7-6274-server-663809-421 This should do everything you need

That's a lot of money for a server not even on the hcl, and its a rack server, I'm guessing the op wants a tower?

 

[bmh.01]

A Microserver (N40L) isn't powerful enough imo even for a test bed. I wouldn't worry about the HCL in the slightest for a test bed, hell a decent whitebox with well used and proven hardware would be the best bang for buck no need to go prebuild unless you can catch one on a good deal.

 

[cava83]

A Microserver (N40L) isn't powerful enough imo even for a test bed. I wouldn't worry about the HCL in the slightest for a test bed, hell a decent whitebox with well used and proven hardware would be the best bang for buck no need to go prebuild unless you can catch one on a good deal.

Of course it is, but depending on what you need. If you are just testing ESXi it's more than enough, if you are building a clustered XenApp/Desktop farm, of course it's not.........

all depends on requirements.

 

[cava83]

That's a lot of money for a server not even on the hcl, and its a rack server, I'm guessing the op wants a tower?

Totally agree, for that money, no way. You need to ensure it's on the HCL, at that price, I would consider that as going towards enterprise grade and you would want that to be on the HCL.

 

[Gareth]

The N40L is too underpowered as said, I've got one and now also have an ML110 G7 (Xeon Quad-Core 3.2Ghz)

 

[cava83]

The N40L is too underpowered as said, I've got one and now also have an ML110 G7 (Xeon Quad-Core 3.2Ghz)

The ML110 G7's are excellent, are you using ECC ram on it? (I have a couple of G6's for messing around with) They are actually surprisingly quiet, apart when you reboot them. Some people have up to 32gb in them, shame their cash back offers have gone.

Thanks,

G.

 

[Gareth]

Yes, you have to use ECC, you can fudge 32GB in them but I don't need it so have gone with the recommended 16GB. The G7 is a pain in the arse tbh, noisy as hell for no reason, apparently the G6 was the same until a BIOS update.

 

[ivegota16v]

:laugh:

Esxi is free, with one server you aren't going to use any of the features of either product, but the esxi is free. Oh and it's not based on windows, win......

i guess you are aware that hyper v on 2012 is also a free product?

http://blogs.technet.com/b/keithmay...hyperv-virtualization-itpro.aspx#.UHlYGLQUVqs

you can also install it just as a hyper visor if you so wish (although yes it is indeed based on windows, but im not going to get into the linux vs windows debate here, as that will just go on and on and on ....)

have you also seen the documents comparing VSphere to server 2012? server 2012 beats nearly every single aspect, be it features, price, max vm size, performance, networking etc etc

have a look at the document here, bit of a long read mind you! Why Hyper-V? - Download Center - Microsoft

my view is that vmware are going to lose a lot of market share this year, specially when you compare the pricing.

as you stated lab servers always end up going into production and then that means i need more features = need flexmigration, need HA, yada yada = ££££££££££ and by then your already down the route and locked into a vmware solution...

to the OP - have a look at hyper v and see what you think its worth investigating...

 

[dk]

That's not the point, the response I was making was to you saying windows 2012 was much cheaper, in this case, both the base products he needs are free, so no it's not.....

and i won't get into the windows hyper-v vs VMware debate, I work for the biggest Microsoft reseller in the UK, I have every bit of info I need on both products, and Microsoft are always playing catchup, and they are still now, even with the release of 2012.

The 'pub' figures you talk about are total b****cks, we've already had a discussion in house between our engineers, and the numbers mean nothing, theya re so ridiculous, that no-one is every getting near the VMware numbers, let alone worrying about Microsoft spurting out ridiculous ones, which lets face it, VMware could just come out and publish new numbers if they wanted, there's just no need as the figures are so ridiculous.

Vmware is a proven technology, they are the Cisco of the virtualisation world, the top 500 companies in the world are running VMware (and yes that includes Microsoft in their labs ).

hyper-v is appealing to the smaller companies as people perceive it as being free.....and not even the document that Microsoft has published comparing it to VMware mentions system center requirements to manage the stuff.

i can install and teach someone to use VMware in a day, there's no way you can do that with hyper-v, it's a nightmare to manage and setup compared to VMware, so the professional services required to install and set it up properly is a big cost.

oh and it's still based on windows......

 

[ivegota16v]

That's not the point, the response I was making was to you saying windows 2012 was much cheaper, in this case, both the base products he needs are free, so no it's not.....

and i won't get into the windows hyper-v vs VMware debate, I work for the biggest Microsoft reseller in the UK, I have every bit of info I need on both products, and Microsoft are always playing catchup, and they are still now, even with the release of 2012.

The 'pub' figures you talk about are total b****cks, we've already had a discussion in house between our engineers, and the numbers mean nothing, theya re so ridiculous, that no-one is every getting near the VMware numbers, let alone worrying about Microsoft spurting out ridiculous ones, which lets face it, VMware could just come out and publish new numbers if they wanted, there's just no need as the figures are so ridiculous.

Vmware is a proven technology, they are the Cisco of the virtualisation world, the top 500 companies in the world are running VMware (and yes that includes Microsoft in their labs ).

hyper-v is appealing to the smaller companies as people perceive it as being free.....and not even the document that Microsoft has published comparing it to VMware mentions system center requirements to manage the stuff.

i can install and teach someone to use VMware in a day, there's no way you can do that with hyper-v, it's a nightmare to manage and setup compared to VMware, so the professional services required to install and set it up properly is a big cost.

oh and it's still based on windows......

some things in your post here i agree with, others not so ill go into a bit more detail on the specific items...

i fully agree that vmware are the "cisco" of the virtualization world, and are the tried and tested solution. Im VCP and have been preaching the VMware solution for many years... but.. if you look into the figures VMware actually lost market share to MS last year and with the release of server 2012 and hyperv they are going (in my opinion and many others are going to lose a lot more.

Microsoft running vmware in the labs? do you mean a simple test lab here for comparison testing or there internal infrastructure, as i can 100% guarantee that MS runs on server 2012 and hyperv, as does azure, bing, etc etc.

on the management side i agree that you do need VMM2012 to take it to the "next level" but for small company's you don't need to use this, you can do all the basics with the built in hyperv remote management tools. As we are touching on the VMM2012 being tricky to install and an expensive professional services i disagree here, VMM2012 is easy to install and get up and running, you dont need to have the whole SCCM 2012 suite, just SQL server and your in business.

now as for the numbers being b****cks, this might be the case for customers that you are working with, but its certainly not for mine, i know of customers who want to have huge oracle or SAP hana database all in memory, they want to push as much ram and as much CPU as they can into these boxes, over 2TB in some cases and 128 threads. They are also loving the new I/O performance that you can get out of 1 VM on hyperv2012, over 1 million i/o's. not to mention they dont have to worry about paying x amount of $$$$ to unlock the HA features, advanced networking etc.

Speaking of networking, VMware cant do the network Virtualization that hyperv can either (eg more than just vlans), there is an interesting article here http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/TechEd/NorthAmerica/2012/VIR305

these feature is massively popular with the service providers/ hosters i deal with, vmware have recently bought a company to try and get this into there stack

anyhow, so to the OP it looks like you have had both sides of the fence of what solution to go for, my view is go free hyper v and grab a server mentioned in the early posts, if you going vmware though, got to agree with DK here, stick to the HCL!

 

[dk]

We could go back and forth all day really, we obviously aren't going to agree.

but....when you are the number one, by a long way, normally, the only way it can go is for you to lose market share, same thing happened with HP and their blades, nobody could compete against them, then dell bought out a similar product, not as good, but dell customers bought it, therefore taking away from the over 70% share of the market Hp had.

and of course I mean in test labs for Microsoft, I was mentioning it before you did in a reply.....

the numbers are b****cks, like I said, VMware could easily match them, I'm sure of that, they just haven't had to because nobody was even close to them, now ms has come out with these, I can bet VMware will bring out similar numbers, when they were always the highest, what's the point in bringing out new numbers, save them for later when you need them. I'd like you to show me all these servers that run with 320 logical processors please, I'd like to get some for my test lab.......

and do you really think that customers running sap, oracle and 2tb of ram on vms really care about the cost of the VMware it's sitting on, they want the best platform possible to keep those servers running, and just like in the old days where nobody would get fired for buying blue (IBM), the same is true for VMware, nobody will question your decision, however running hyper-v would need justification as to why you were choosing it over VMware. Admittedly that is changing, and now Microsoft has a decent first product out it will continue to change, but VMware aren't going to sit on their arses, 5.1 is already out (not sure if that makes that ms doc wrong now as that's based on version 5). Oh and 1 million io's, you're looking at a serious San to offer those sorts of figures, and normally you would even have to look whether virtualisation is even the right thing for that server.

As far as advanced networking goes, you can do Cisco end to end with the 1000v, we are a hosting company, have hundreds of customers on our solution of Hp blades, flex fabric, VMware enterprise plus and nexus 5000 switching (although we are now going 7000 I believe as we are growing so fast), all on a 3par San, but even though we are a massive ms house, VMware is the only option when hosting customers, you never have to justify yourself, Customers have never questioned the fact that we use VMware, the same wouldn't be true if we ere running on hyper-v, we wouldn't have the number of customers we have, it's just a fact. And we don't have any issues with networking and multi tenancy.

Maybe you could find some non-MS docs to back up your argument, yes ms are up and coming and will get better all the time, and this new release is the first real contender for VMware, but VMware aren't going anywhere.

 

[ivegota16v]

We could go back and forth all day really, we obviously aren't going to agree.

but....when you are the number one, by a long way, normally, the only way it can go is for you to lose market share, same thing happened with HP and their blades, nobody could compete against them, then dell bought out a similar product, not as good, but dell customers bought it, therefore taking away from the over 70% share of the market Hp had.

and of course I mean in test labs for Microsoft, I was mentioning it before you did in a reply.....

the numbers are b****cks, like I said, VMware could easily match them, I'm sure of that, they just haven't had to because nobody was even close to them, now ms has come out with these, I can bet VMware will bring out similar numbers, when they were always the highest, what's the point in bringing out new numbers, save them for later when you need them. I'd like you to show me all these servers that run with 320 logical processors please, I'd like to get some for my test lab.......

and do you really think that customers running sap, oracle and 2tb of ram on vms really care about the cost of the VMware it's sitting on, they want the best platform possible to keep those servers running, and just like in the old days where nobody would get fired for buying blue (IBM), the same is true for VMware, nobody will question your decision, however running hyper-v would need justification as to why you were choosing it over VMware. Admittedly that is changing, and now Microsoft has a decent first product out it will continue to change, but VMware aren't going to sit on their arses, 5.1 is already out (not sure if that makes that ms doc wrong now as that's based on version 5). Oh and 1 million io's, you're looking at a serious San to offer those sorts of figures, and normally you would even have to look whether virtualisation is even the right thing for that server.

As far as advanced networking goes, you can do Cisco end to end with the 1000v, we are a hosting company, have hundreds of customers on our solution of Hp blades, flex fabric, VMware enterprise plus and nexus 5000 switching (although we are now going 7000 I believe as we are growing so fast), all on a 3par San, but even though we are a massive ms house, VMware is the only option when hosting customers, you never have to justify yourself, Customers have never questioned the fact that we use VMware, the same wouldn't be true if we ere running on hyper-v, we wouldn't have the number of customers we have, it's just a fact. And we don't have any issues with networking and multi tenancy.

Maybe you could find some non-MS docs to back up your argument, yes ms are up and coming and will get better all the time, and this new release is the first real contender for VMware, but VMware aren't going anywhere.

well one thing i think we can agree on is that we are never going to agree on this one.... and we didn't even bring red hat / citrix into the argument either.. - horses for courses and all that!

new MS doc is here incase your interested (comparing 5.1) https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=7edf4c4ce8729f83&id=7EDF4C4CE8729F83!1846

one thing though DK, your not always right in the world of IT.... just because you do xyz doesn't make it the law/ solution for every customer....

 

[dk]

*It's you're.

Oh and my replies aren't opinion, they are stating the facts, you struggling to come up with a list of servers with 320 logical processors for my lab?

 

[ivegota16v]

nope not struggling, have just been out today.. how does an SGI UV fit? your going to need a big lab though..

thanks for the grammar correction, ill make sure to file that in my special folder....

as for the facts ill quote this "VMware is the only option when hosting customers, you never have to justify yourself, Customers have never questioned the fact that we use VMware, the same wouldn't be true if we ere running on hyper-v, we wouldn't have the number of customers we have, it's just a fact. And we don't have any issues with networking and multi tenancy"

So what about all the customers on azure then? does this not count as hosting? i hear there are one of two customers on it...

i love your attitude "its DK's way or the wrong way" ... makes me smile

 

[dk]

sorry, i should have been more clear, i wanted a server from a real manufacturer, like one i wouldn't have to bribe a customer to look at. oh and a list, not just 1, nobody buys servers for virtualisation with 320 cores, thats why, because you don't get enough memory in those boxes to take advantage of the cores, they would be wasted. Plus you don't just buy 1 or 2 big boxes, you scale out to give you more protection.

The majority of servers i see out there with simply 2 hex cores, and the server sits at 10% processor utilisation, its all about memory!

And how is azure a comeback for my statement? of course they have customers, as they wouldn't offer the service if they didn't, people like microsoft, we sell a lot more microsoft than we do vmware, but when it comes to hosting and the platform you are offering, you will never have to justify in a proposal why you are using vmware, thats just a fact, like in my earlier comment that we never have to justify using cisco or hp in our offering. If we were to go to a customer and say well, we run hyper-v on SGI and net gear switches and a whiptail san, we would need to justify our reasons for choosing those products over the mainstream acceptable products used by the majority of large companies.

And hyper-v is one of those, like it or not, and as i said, this is changing, but today, that's how it is.

I don't work for vmware, i don't sell vmware, i just install technologies, and i know what technologies work time and time again and don't need justification because they just do what they say on the tin, and very well.

This is my job, i've been doing it a while, and I'm not someone who just reads things and believes them and spurts them out. I don't believe anything anyone says until i see it myself, i base all my opinions and advice on real world knowledge, and I'm told I'm very good at what i do.

Out of interest, whats your job specifically?

 

[ivegota16v]

man, this could go on for a while...

lets be honest here, you only chose the 320 core fact on hyper v as you and i both know that there isn't a server that is "main stream" with these specs. The 320 core is just one figure that you chose to play on, its a spec of hyper v but not a massive selling point, it was you that pointed out this. in fact i never even mentioned the 320 core spec...

again we both know that the main stream boxes are dual socket hex or quad socket 10s with usually a max of 1-2tb ram.

i mentioned azure in my post as in your statement you seemed to be suggesting that customers are only interested in hosting on vmware, i quote "if we ere running on hyper-v, we wouldn't have the number of customers we have, it's just a fact. Azure has many thousands of customers running the VM role, azure is running on hyper v, therefore not all customer are specifying that it has to be vmware for there hosting needs.

again i agreed with you that hyperv is the upcoming solution but a lot of the industry and myself see that its going to gain a large market share this year, only time will tell..

i dont doubt that you recommend good solutions to your customers and do a good job, but sometimes when someone suggests a solution that you don't agree with, or not the way you would do it you feel the need to try to jump down their neck and try to make them look small, not a good look in my opinion.

as for my job, I'm a consultant for worlds biggest software company , also been doing this for a while, i like to think I'm not to bad... and before that i was a consultant for the worlds number 1 chip company speccing solutions from VDI to huge HPC clusters (hence why i knew the SGI server) ...

the OP asked for a solution, both will work fine for him and do all of his needs so enough of the bickering...

on a side note I'm interested, are you guys reselling the azure services yet?

 

[dk]

Flol, you work for Microsoft, that's brilliant, so you're not at all impartial.

A fine example of why the hyper-v figures are seen as pub figures, is the 320 core stat, I just picked the first one on the list

I hear more and more about hyper-v as the weeks go by, and we have started to invest in engineers in the area, it's only a matter of time before the work comes in around that, especially with 2012 being launched.

I personally don't know if we sell azure as that would be our Microsoft team, if its resellable and people want it them I, sure we do, but our focus will be selling our own cloud offering I would have thought, it's a very fast growing part of our business.

i can see this conversation being different if we had it in a years time......

As we're name dropping, I used to work for the worlds biggest technology company, that was 14 years ago now, god I'm getting on!

 

[dk]

I was going to send you this by pm, but you're full so I'll just post it here

Btw, I wasn't jumping down your throat, if you thought that then I didn't mean it to be taken like that, I just like a healthy discussion, especially around technology.

i was on the debate team at school, I like a bit of mass debating, it's healthy and stimulating.


Dk

 

[ivegota16v]

Flol, you work for Microsoft, that's brilliant, so you're not at all impartial.

A fine example of why the hyper-v figures are seen as pub figures, is the 320 core stat, I just picked the first one on the list

I hear more and more about hyper-v as the weeks go by, and we have started to invest in engineers in the area, it's only a matter of time before the work comes in around that, especially with 2012 being launched.

I personally don't know if we sell azure as that would be our Microsoft team, if its resellable and people want it them I, sure we do, but our focus will be selling our own cloud offering I would have thought, it's a very fast growing part of our business.

i can see this conversation being different if we had it in a years time......

As we're name dropping, I used to work for the worlds biggest technology company, that was 14 years ago now, god I'm getting on!

Yeah i dont usually drop the MS/Intel name but if I'm honest I'm pretty impartial, its good to know the strengths and weakness of the products, at intel i was totally agnostic hence being VCP etc and knowing all the various solutions

if you get a sec have a play with vmm2012 and server 2012, and if you want to do some more interesting stuff connect it up to azure and see how easy it is to push those VMS up to the cloud. Clouds the future thats for sure

good discussion though

 

[cava83]

Come on boys, kiss and make up.