Saturday, April 25, 2009
Hyper-v problems part 2
This one I want to discuss management
First of all microsoft states that best practices is to deploy hyper-v on server-core. As someone with a long history of someone with CLI experience the idea of managing a windows server, specially your single point of failure with microsofts badly implemented CLI interface makes me cringe.
In test lab we already ran across one situation which having a comprehensive interface would have saved a lot of work. In the lab we deployed a stand alone server-core test platform, and some virtuals ... we then decided to build out a domain and join it to the domain. The problem being after that we did not have WMI rights to remotly open the server manager remotly , and to join it to the SCVMM instance we needed to update hyper-v to the RC. But the virtuals we deployed earlier started before the main OS instance and we could not update hyper-v with virtuals running.
We got the problem resolved (removing and re-adding it to the domain after deleting the computer profile) resolved but simply being able to stop virtuals from the CLI would have saved a lot of troubleshooting
SCVMM VS VM
My second qualm is SCVMM which seems very 1st release, problems with naming between the two and how it behaves are common.
SCVMM also falls short in controlls in a HA mode, which is controlled through microsoft clustering not within SCVMM moving virtuals, controlling them, all of which is done outside the SCVMM the tool just does not have the power, controlls or reliability
We found ourselfs going back to VM at times as well to just perform simple actions like controlling the virtual networks. Some of this may be overcome with familiarity with the tool but a lot of it just feels more disjointed.
Monitoring
Hyper-v, from a built in standpoint hyper-v has almost NO advanced monitoring capability. Tracking either virtual or host performance is an almost imposible task. Scaling out to the cluster level and tracking performance is almost impossible
They promice this ability but they achive it through Pro-tips which is only avalaible deploying SC Opps manager which a very large and complicated and expensive product. I am a fan of opps man but deploying such a huge product for what SHOULD be integrated into SCVMM seems silly to me, not to mention requiring a lot of work to get out of the box
I will discuss some of the other shortcomings later
First of all microsoft states that best practices is to deploy hyper-v on server-core. As someone with a long history of someone with CLI experience the idea of managing a windows server, specially your single point of failure with microsofts badly implemented CLI interface makes me cringe.
In test lab we already ran across one situation which having a comprehensive interface would have saved a lot of work. In the lab we deployed a stand alone server-core test platform, and some virtuals ... we then decided to build out a domain and join it to the domain. The problem being after that we did not have WMI rights to remotly open the server manager remotly , and to join it to the SCVMM instance we needed to update hyper-v to the RC. But the virtuals we deployed earlier started before the main OS instance and we could not update hyper-v with virtuals running.
We got the problem resolved (removing and re-adding it to the domain after deleting the computer profile) resolved but simply being able to stop virtuals from the CLI would have saved a lot of troubleshooting
SCVMM VS VM
My second qualm is SCVMM which seems very 1st release, problems with naming between the two and how it behaves are common.
SCVMM also falls short in controlls in a HA mode, which is controlled through microsoft clustering not within SCVMM moving virtuals, controlling them, all of which is done outside the SCVMM the tool just does not have the power, controlls or reliability
We found ourselfs going back to VM at times as well to just perform simple actions like controlling the virtual networks. Some of this may be overcome with familiarity with the tool but a lot of it just feels more disjointed.
Monitoring
Hyper-v, from a built in standpoint hyper-v has almost NO advanced monitoring capability. Tracking either virtual or host performance is an almost imposible task. Scaling out to the cluster level and tracking performance is almost impossible
They promice this ability but they achive it through Pro-tips which is only avalaible deploying SC Opps manager which a very large and complicated and expensive product. I am a fan of opps man but deploying such a huge product for what SHOULD be integrated into SCVMM seems silly to me, not to mention requiring a lot of work to get out of the box
I will discuss some of the other shortcomings later
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]