Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/26/2012)
SpringTownDBA (7/26/2012)
Ok, I understand what you're describing.If the VM host is ONLY going to host 1 VM EVER, then what is the value added by vmware? It's not free, and does introduce some (slight) overhead so it needs to be justified to be thrown into the mix. What is their justification?
Of course, if I was a shady sysadmin, I could say it would be dedicated to sql server, then later sneak some additional VM's onto it. That pesky DBA would never notice his server slowing down one day, and if he did complain, I could move the extra VM's off....
hardware abstraction. Zero issues in moving hardware from the windows side. Ease of migration to new hardware.
There are some nice benefits on 1:1 host:vm planning. Especially if you install this as a single node cluster (and you should think about it).
Steve/SpringTownDBA - The reasons listed above by Steve are the same that I was given for the use of VMWare and to my understanding it is a single node cluster.
One thing that this is NOT is cheaper. The additional license costs to use VMWare almost tripled the total cost of the server; at least thats what I was told. I admit I can not speakk about VMWare from a knowelagable perspective but it does NOt sound like a good deal to me when it drives up the total cost that much.
Thanks
Kindest Regards,
Just say No to Facebook!