Why I moved away from virtualization of SQL server?

Question

Why I moved away from virtualization of SQL server?

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

frederico_fonseca SSCoach Points: 16279 More actions · Answer 1

If you license your box for SQL Enterprise and if you have software assurance costs do not increase with virtualization. Without SA or with SQL Standard then yes it does increase

In my shop we have over 2200 VM's - over 200 ESX Hosts and a few are exclusive for SQL - where the physical box is licensed (Ent + SA) - with over 400 SQL Instances

Virtualization allows you to separate instances easily and to have potentially more instances "behaving" well within the same physical box
with virtualization and well built ESX cluster you can vmotion boxes around to suit workload and allow for ESX Hosts maintenance.
If your Physical "blows" you are left with just 1 host - with ESX if you have a cluster you just move the VM's around and still keep the cluster functionality

Grant Fritchey SSC Guru Points: 399330 More actions · Answer 2

It's not always about performance. My company has largely stopped buying servers (I think, one in the last 6-7 years). Instead, we're hosting most things on VMs online, or in services online. Performance through a VM can be adequate, or even good. It really depends on your systems, your needs and your load. It may be that you're in a situation where iron is the only solution. Lots and lots of others are not.

In addition to straight VM or not VM, also look at some of the management and DR scenarios that virtualization can offer. Sometimes people will sacrifice a little performance for a better DR solution.

But, frankly, if iron is working for you, stay with it. Nothing says you're required to move to VMs.

"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt

Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning

sterling3721 SSChasing Mays Points: 658 More actions · Answer 3

thank you, Grant and Frederico_fonseca. On cluster is still on virtual, performance on VM is acceptable and it's not the issue. The main reason is the cost: double SQL server licensing fee and vmware cost.

I ran into vMotion twice. The first time, during normal hours, infrastructure team tested the vMotion feature without telling anyone and the sql server failed over; the second time, off peak, I was notified and for testing only, still failed over. As a DBA, I have no access to VM hosts. I cannot access this feature.