No more hiding in the server room

I need to replace a server... migration advice?

Hello all

I have a monster of a machine running as an Exchange Edge server and would like to replace it with a machine more appropriately sized. The problem, of course, is down-time. Conventional methods involve setting up a second server, clustering the Edge role, and then shutting down the original Edge. I've considered using bare-metal restore technology, which seems to be quite neat, but I'm nervous to try to fool the HT and CAS server that this "new" Edge server is the same one that's been there all along...

Have any of you done something like this before? What would you advise?

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Matt Simmons on June 25, 2009 at 7:43pm

I've not done anything like this before, but before you take the plunge, might I bend your ear toward a possible virtualization solution? It seems to be the way of the world that more and more services are moving onto VMs. If you did this now, it might save you more hassle in the long run, and would definitely facilitate easier imaging, backup, and migration.

Many (all?) virtualization solutions have well documented migration paths from hardware to virtual machine. While you're moving, you might as well move forward.

Just my $0.02.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Greeff on June 26, 2009 at 11:01am

That certainly is a good point, and I'm playing with virtualisation at the moment. I'm leaning towards either VMWare Server or Server 2008 Core with Hyper-V. What I like about the concept of Hyper-V is that there is no dependancy on the host operating system - the VMs interact directly with the hardware.

This sounds fantastic - has anyone proven it? I'm currently in the process of trying to get the *&^$# thing installed and fumbling with it, I'm afraid. Where, oh where would we be without a GUI??? Right where I am now... having to learn command-line administration!

A little over a year ago, I replaced our domain controller. At that time, I used VMWare Converter to migrate from physical to virtual and actually ran it from time to time when it was needed. I'm surprised at my short memory.

Would somebody like to give their $0.02 worth on Hyper-V vs VMWare or anything related?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Simmons on June 26, 2009 at 6:02pm

I don't have the expertise that you're looking for, but I pay attention to what other people say, so here's what I know, and what I've heard:

I currently use vmware server 2.x to host my VMs. It does require an underlying operating system, as you know. There is another product from VMware called ESX that does not. It, like Hyper-V, is a bare-metal hypervisor. While "ESX" itself is commercial and supported by VMware, there is a free version called ESXi which functions in a nearly-identical manner. Administration is done through the web (similarly to vmware server, from what I hear), and not through vmware admin applications.

I think in the end, it will come down to what administrative interface you're comfortable and familiar with. I haven't read anything that accuses Hyper-V of being less stable than the competition, and the same with VMware.

If you've got time, build some test machines and see which admin interface you can live with and which makes you happier.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McGrath on June 26, 2009 at 7:26pm

I am currently running VM Server with my VM's also. It does a fine job for what I use it for, and the interface (VM client) allows you to pretty much what you would if you were sitting in front of the machine.

I don't have experience with Hyper-V, and I don't see me installing it soon either.

My $0.02...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Greeff on June 28, 2009 at 8:11am

John, I'm enjoying VMWare Server. It seems to be very light on resources compared with MS Virtual PC, which is great. My poor workstation at the office is my VM host at this stage, so I'm dying to get this function moved to a server.

I haven't used the VM client you refer to... I'm only using the web-management interface of VMWare Server. Then I sometimes use the console from inside that, or I just use remote desktop. How is the VM Client different?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hengesbach on June 27, 2009 at 1:57am

My biggest comment on Hyper-V versus VMware is maturity. They are both well supported products from strong vendors and each has a free/low cost option. VMWare has been doing virtualization on x86 for a long time (in technology years) and they have the IMHO best vision moving forward.

You have to ask yourself a few questions when trying to pick a Hypervisor to live with. 1) What is my long term virtualization strategy? 2) What management features do I need? 3) What is affordable?

If you have an overall strategy to move towards virtualization, then Q2 becomes critical. If there isn't a strong virtualization strategy, picking one over the other may not be a big deal.

I use ESXi currently for all my VM's (DC's, SQL Server, Exchange 2K3, linux proxy, MS Terminal Servers, various app servers). I started from VMWare Server 1.0.x used 2(horrible web interface) for a bit then hit some walls on performance - ESXi solved those. ESXi is managed via the Virtual Infrastructure Client app - it's the same app used on full bore, bell's and whistles installs. VMware made an announcement that the future of their products will be based on the ESXi paradigm (no service console VM like ESX) - sorry don't have the link handy. I selected VMWare because I knew as the use of virtualization expanded at my employer, I'd have the simplest path to a feature full product line that comes from a company with a robust history.

If you use any other OS's than MS Server, VMware also offers the broadest support on that front.

There have to be some Solaris Zones, Xen people out there with good bits to add as well.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Simmons on June 27, 2009 at 2:24am

Awesome post, Jeff. Thanks!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Greeff on June 28, 2009 at 8:08am

I agree with Matt - very helpful information. I'm really new to enterprise-level virtualisation, so the management side of it is totally foreign to me. ESXi is free, yes, but then the management client is not, am I right? As for Hyper-V, I see Microsoft are offering a bare-metal hypervisor now... I haven't tried it yet.

I have a fat laptop that I'd like to use to test both of these, but I'm having trouble with ESXi 3.5 U4 and 4.0 not supporting the storage contoller. If anyone has the low-down on getting it to work on a Compaq Presario CQ50, please let me know! It currently has Server 2008 Core installed on it so I can't easily tell you what the storage controller chipset is... I'll post here if I find a way around it.

Thanks to all. Out of all the forums I've joined in the past few years, you guys have been the fastest to respond.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Simmons on June 28, 2009 at 1:33pm

Paul,

Thanks for the kind words :-) I think I can speak for Jeff when I say that we just genuinely like helping people.

I was thinking along the same lines as you, that the Virtual Infrastructure Client was commercial, but according to the download page (https://www.vmware.com/tryvmware/?p=esxi), it looks like each ESXi license includes a license to run the client. Horray for VMware!

Incidentally, if you're looking for more management paths, you might check this article I found: http://www.virtualizationadmin.com/articles-tutorials/vmware-esx-ar...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chinny Chukwudozie on November 23, 2009 at 11:26pm

Your best route here could be to implement Virtualization Technology using vmware tools.You could use the VMware convert to quickly create a "copy" of your exchange server on top of an ESXi4.0 hypervisor host managed with a vsphere client.All tools are free.You would need to test the process before an actual migration. I recommend the VMWare ESXi 4.0 becuase it has a very light unix footprint(32mb) and allows your access to as much resources on your physical machine as possible combined with the Dynamic Resource Scheduling (DRS) functionality. This process should definitely work for you.