VMWare and iSCSI for Exchange 2007

MS Poster · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 11

Hello:

We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small Exchange 2007
deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server with 8GB
of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box. That machine
attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general, we like
virtualized machines for their flexibility.

Questions:
- With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on the new
machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various roles on different
virtual machines?
- Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and consolidating
all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
- Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was planning
to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as separate
LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I really gaining
anything by doing this since the host is has only a single connection to
the array?

Many thanks.

Archived from group: microsoft>public>exchange>design

Mark Arnold [MVP] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 1126

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
wrote:

>Hello:
>
>We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small Exchange 2007
>deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server with 8GB
>of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box. That machine
>attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general, we like
>virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>
>Questions:
>- With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on the new
>machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various roles on different
>virtual machines?
>- Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and consolidating
>all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>- Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was planning
>to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as separate
>LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I really gaining
>anything by doing this since the host is has only a single connection to
>the array?
>
>Many thanks.
>
You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one of
support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If you're
not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
say this is an ESX based question?!?
The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor, model
and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.

Dgoldman [MSFT] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 45

Your best bet would be to not put it on there or wait for longhorn server.

--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Dgoldman
http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
Download OABInteg
(http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)

"Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
> wrote:
>
>>Hello:
>>
>>We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small Exchange
>>2007
>>deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server with 8GB
>>of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box. That
>>machine
>>attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general, we like
>>virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>>
>>Questions:
>>- With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on the new
>>machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various roles on
>>different
>>virtual machines?
>>- Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and
>>consolidating
>>all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>>- Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was planning
>>to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as separate
>>LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I really
>>gaining
>>anything by doing this since the host is has only a single connection to
>>the array?
>>
>>Many thanks.
>>
> You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
> putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
> separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one of
> support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If you're
> not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
> former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
> If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
> the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
> say this is an ESX based question?!?
> The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
> got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor, model
> and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.

MS Poster · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 11

Thanks for the feedback from both of you.

This was a GSX (or whatever they currently call it) question. Waiting for
Longhorn is not an option; this needs to be done in the next 30 days. I assume
Longhorn supports 64-bit virtualization? (I am certainly not a Microsoft-basher,
but this 64-bit issue is extremely frustrating and is 100% Microsoft's fault.)

So, just to be clear: you would recommned running it on native hardware (i.e.,
no virtualization) and omitting the Edge role? Again, I really only have
one box to throw at this. Your concerns with virtualization are: lack of
MS support and resource demands by the MB role, correct?

The iSCSI array is an Equallogic PS300e with 14 x 500GB 7200rpm SATA drives
and 3Gb connectivitiy to the iSCSI switch.

Many thanks.

Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],

> Your best bet would be to not put it on there or wait for longhorn
> server.
>
> Dgoldman
> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
> Download OABInteg
> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A
> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
> "Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
> @4ax.com...
>
>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello:
>>>
>>> We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small
>>> Exchange
>>> 2007
>>> deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server
>>> with 8GB
>>> of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box. That
>>> machine
>>> attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general,
>>> we like
>>> virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>>> Questions:
>>> - With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on
>>> the new
>>> machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various roles
>>> on
>>> different
>>> virtual machines?
>>> - Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and
>>> consolidating
>>> all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>>> - Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was
>>> planning
>>> to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as
>>> separate
>>> LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I
>>> really
>>> gaining
>>> anything by doing this since the host is has only a single
>>> connection to
>>> the array?
>>> Many thanks.
>>>
>> You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
>> putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
>> separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one of
>> support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If
>> you're
>> not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
>> former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
>> If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
>> the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
>> say this is an ESX based question?!?
>> The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
>> got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor, model
>> and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.

Oliver Moazzezi [MVP] · Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 583

I would scrap the virtualisation piece. There's no point, you only have one
piece of tin. If that has any issues you're Exchange Org is down anyhow.

Consolidate roles and use the Exchange 2007 storage calculator to give you
an idea on IOPS and LUN size.

Oliver

(yes 2008 servers virtualisation piece will support 64bit images).

Dgoldman [MSFT] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 45

I dont want to point the finger anywhere and 64 bit is the wave of the
future Smile

I would recommend running it on native hardware because if you
have a problem support will not really be a great option. If it turns out
that you are having a driver issue that is related to the virtualization
software, you are going to be asked to remove exchange from vmware and test
it on regular hardware.

--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Dgoldman
http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
Download OABInteg
(http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)

"MS Poster" wrote in message @msnews.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the feedback from both of you.
> This was a GSX (or whatever they currently call it) question. Waiting for
> Longhorn is not an option; this needs to be done in the next 30 days. I
> assume Longhorn supports 64-bit virtualization? (I am certainly not a
> Microsoft-basher, but this 64-bit issue is extremely frustrating and is
> 100% Microsoft's fault.)
>
> So, just to be clear: you would recommned running it on native hardware
> (i.e., no virtualization) and omitting the Edge role? Again, I really only
> have one box to throw at this. Your concerns with virtualization are: lack
> of MS support and resource demands by the MB role, correct?
>
> The iSCSI array is an Equallogic PS300e with 14 x 500GB 7200rpm SATA
> drives and 3Gb connectivitiy to the iSCSI switch.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],
>
>> Your best bet would be to not put it on there or wait for longhorn
>> server.
>>
>> Dgoldman
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
>> Download OABInteg
>> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A
>> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
>> "Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
>> @4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small
>>>> Exchange
>>>> 2007
>>>> deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server
>>>> with 8GB
>>>> of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box. That
>>>> machine
>>>> attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general,
>>>> we like
>>>> virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>>>> Questions:
>>>> - With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on
>>>> the new
>>>> machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various roles
>>>> on
>>>> different
>>>> virtual machines?
>>>> - Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and
>>>> consolidating
>>>> all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>>>> - Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was
>>>> planning
>>>> to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as
>>>> separate
>>>> LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I
>>>> really
>>>> gaining
>>>> anything by doing this since the host is has only a single
>>>> connection to
>>>> the array?
>>>> Many thanks.
>>>>
>>> You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
>>> putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
>>> separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one of
>>> support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If
>>> you're
>>> not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
>>> former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
>>> If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
>>> the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
>>> say this is an ESX based question?!?
>>> The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
>>> got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor, model
>>> and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.
>
>

MS Poster · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 11

Ok. Thanks, all. Much appreciated!

Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],

> I dont want to point the finger anywhere and 64 bit is the wave of the
> future Smile

I would recommend running it on native hardware because if
> you have a problem support will not really be a great option. If it
> turns out that you are having a driver issue that is related to the
> virtualization software, you are going to be asked to remove exchange
> from vmware and test it on regular hardware.
>
> Dgoldman
> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
> Download OABInteg
> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid=A
> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
> "MS Poster" wrote in message
> @msnews.microsoft.com...
>
>> Thanks for the feedback from both of you.
>> This was a GSX (or whatever they currently call it) question. Waiting
>> for
>> Longhorn is not an option; this needs to be done in the next 30 days.
>> I
>> assume Longhorn supports 64-bit virtualization? (I am certainly not a
>> Microsoft-basher, but this 64-bit issue is extremely frustrating and
>> is
>> 100% Microsoft's fault.)
>> So, just to be clear: you would recommned running it on native
>> hardware (i.e., no virtualization) and omitting the Edge role? Again,
>> I really only have one box to throw at this. Your concerns with
>> virtualization are: lack of MS support and resource demands by the MB
>> role, correct?
>>
>> The iSCSI array is an Equallogic PS300e with 14 x 500GB 7200rpm SATA
>> drives and 3Gb connectivitiy to the iSCSI switch.
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> Hello Dgoldman [MSFT],
>>
>>> Your best bet would be to not put it on there or wait for longhorn
>>> server.
>>>
>>> Dgoldman
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/dgoldman
>>> Download OABInteg
>>> (http://gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Download.aspx?SampleGuid
>>> =A
>>> 2338E73-F521-4071-9B1D-AAF49C346ACD)
>>> "Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote in message
>>> @4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello:
>>>>>
>>>>> We are assessing using VMWare and an iSCSI array for our small
>>>>> Exchange
>>>>> 2007
>>>>> deployment (around 150 users). We have a single new 64-bit server
>>>>> with 8GB
>>>>> of RAM and small mirrored local disks for the new Exchange box.
>>>>> That
>>>>> machine
>>>>> attaches to an iSCSI array for additional drive space. In general,
>>>>> we like
>>>>> virtualized machines for their flexibility.
>>>>> Questions:
>>>>> - With such a small user base, would it be useful to run VMWare on
>>>>> the new
>>>>> machine, emulate a few 64-bit servers, and run Ex2k7's various
>>>>> roles
>>>>> on
>>>>> different
>>>>> virtual machines?
>>>>> - Or am I better off running Exchange on the native hardware and
>>>>> consolidating
>>>>> all the roles on that box (and omitting the Edge role)?
>>>>> - Regarding drive layout for such a virtual configuration, I was
>>>>> planning
>>>>> to create separate volumes on the iSCSI array and attach them as
>>>>> separate
>>>>> LUNs to the host machine. One LUN for each virtual machine. Am I
>>>>> really
>>>>> gaining
>>>>> anything by doing this since the host is has only a single
>>>>> connection to
>>>>> the array?
>>>>> Many thanks.
>>>> You'll be hard pushed to find anyone who will gladly concur to you
>>>> putting the MB on VMware. Sure, the other roles (inc edge on a
>>>> separate guest) would be great. The major problem you have is one
>>>> of
>>>> support. Go near VMware and MS will wash their hands of you. If
>>>> you're
>>>> not bothered about getting the run around from dodgy support in the
>>>> former Empire then fine, it's a plan and a half. Go for it.
>>>> If you do, separate the roles and prioritize the mailbox roles over
>>>> the other ones (in VMware). If you're using ESX that's fine. Please
>>>> say this is an ESX based question?!?
>>>> The layouts are massively different based on what iSCSI SAN you've
>>>> got. Nobody can give you a legitimate answer until the vendor,
>>>> model
>>>> and number/type/speed of disks are known. It's impossible.

Mark Arnold [MVP] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 1126

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:21:01 +0000 (UTC), MS Poster
wrote:

>Thanks for the feedback from both of you.
>
>This was a GSX (or whatever they currently call it) question. Waiting for
>Longhorn is not an option; this needs to be done in the next 30 days. I assume
>Longhorn supports 64-bit virtualization? (I am certainly not a Microsoft-basher,
>but this 64-bit issue is extremely frustrating and is 100% Microsoft's fault.)
>
>So, just to be clear: you would recommned running it on native hardware (i.e.,
>no virtualization) and omitting the Edge role? Again, I really only have
>one box to throw at this. Your concerns with virtualization are: lack of
>MS support and resource demands by the MB role, correct?
>
>The iSCSI array is an Equallogic PS300e with 14 x 500GB 7200rpm SATA drives
>and 3Gb connectivitiy to the iSCSI switch.
>
>Many thanks.
>

Steer a very very long way. Stick with one physical bit of tin and run
the roles on it. The Equallogic SAN is perfectly good for a fairly
small installation. Follow the guys guidelines (you bought the SAN
from Infrasys perhaps?) as they'll know exactly how they want it
configured.

Exchange 2007 Edge server in Exchange 2003 Organization I would like to deploy Exchange 2007 EDGE servers in my DMZ for incoming email but my entire organization is running Exchange 2003 in an AD 2003 environment. 1. Can I do this? Will the 2007 EDGE servers work with Exchange 2003? 2. If so (and I go to assu

Migrate from Exchange Server 2003 GAL to Exchange 2007 We recently stood up another mail server (2007) from our parent company. I would like to migrate the GAL from my our parent company. They are running Exchange 2003. Any suggestions on how I can move their GAL into our server? Thank you Harry

Comparaison on Exchange 2003 Clustering and Exchange 2007 SP Hi, Was wondering if there is anywhere from MS or other sources that I can find advantages or disadvantages of Exchange 2003 Cluster and Exchange 2007 SP1 SCR. I have a client that want's to implement Exchange 2003 Clustering, but trying to convince him t

Exchange 2007 We have a company with 400 users (in 54 branch offices). We have installed exchange 2007. Can you recommend how many storage groups and how many mailbox databases in each I should create? I'm thinking to create 2 storage groups and about 27 mailbox databa

GroupWise 7 to Exchange 2007 Hi, I understand the Exchange 2003 GroupWise Connector is for GW 6.5. What would be the supported path to migrate from GW 7 over to Exchange 2007? I would think setting up a GW 6.5 server, an Exchange 2003 server with the GW connector, and then an Exchan