1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Failover Cluster running Hyper V Server?

Discussion in 'Servers and Enterprise Solutions' started by james73, May 14, 2019.

  1. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    Ok. I'm a bit of a noob to Server virtualisation. I'd like a set-up as shown below - two physically identical boxes, running Hyper V Server, with a SAN storage attached.

    My question is, can I run my entire network (less than 20 users) on a set-up like this? I'd be looking at around 4, 5 maybe 6 virtual servers on the Cluster boxes. It'd be one Domain Controller (running AD, File Server, etc) and the other servers smaller tasks (email server; back-up schedule; whatever else; etc).

    We've not a big network but we generate a lot of data, hence the SAN.

    [​IMG]


    All suggestions welcome!
     
  2. TheOracle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 30, 2005

    Posts: 10,726

    Can't see too much wrong with it

    Assume you already bought the san?
     
  3. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    No. We have an old Equallogic NAS but the boss wants it replaced.
     
  4. Throrik

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 15, 2009

    Posts: 1,222

    Location: Manchester

    Although there are a thousand and one caveats to any question like this - yes you should be fine - Look at your IOP requirements and engage with SAN VARs to get the best deal you can.
     
  5. TheOracle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 30, 2005

    Posts: 10,726

    Look at the compellent range (sc4000?), it offers a lot of good features. If you have a lot of data, might be worthwhile.

    Just moved from equalogic to compellent myself, it's much, much better! and a lot less faffing about from the windows side.
     
  6. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    Is the Compellent SAS drives or SATA? I think (off the top of my head) one of the reasons the boss wanted shot of the old Equalogic SAN was the cost of the drives.

    Any opinions on a Synology Rackstation NAS?
     
  7. TheOracle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 30, 2005

    Posts: 10,726

    No it's sas and yeah they were expensive
     
  8. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    Roughly, what sort of cost for what sort of capacity?
     
  9. Trig

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 3,515

    Location: Leicestershire

    IP Address Conflict Detected..

    Other than that, looks ok ;)
     
  10. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    :D
     
  11. Caged

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 23,061

    Looks like a lot of stuff for 20 users, and a lot of tin for under 10 VMs. How much data is a lot?
     
  12. james73

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 14, 2005

    Posts: 46

    It's not just how much data we create, it's about how long we have to hold it and make it available.
     
  13. TheOracle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Sep 30, 2005

    Posts: 10,726

    Ideally you want a tiering san then. Flash storage for vms, 10k for current data and 7k for aged data. The san takes care of all this for you.

    In regards to cost, tricky as every system is different depending on requirements. IIRC, our compellent chassis with 25tb 50/50 mix of SSD and 10k was 40k? then we added on an expansion shelf with an additional 25tb of 10k drives for 25k

    so that's 50tb of data, but we can actually fit 100tb on due to 2:1 dedupe

    Yours will be much less as you could probably get away with a few ssds and then a load of 7k. That said, it may be overkill for your requirements.

    Knowing what I know now, I'd never buy another equalogic san
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2019 at 2:05 PM