I am currently in the search of a new windows 2008 vps with hyper-v, I noticed that most hosts offer "Guaranteed RAM" which is great, but I found another host which will ask you to pay an additional monthly fee to guarantee this ram, even on Hyper-v, I am curious to know if not getting this will affect performance of my VPS.
We are looking for a 1GB RAM server since we only host around 6 websites with very small traffic, and only one of those has database connectivity, but still gets very low traffic. We will need to host DNS, IIS, Mail server to start, so, is 1 GB of ram ok for this and should we guarantee it?
I want to provide some windows vps, but not sure if hyper-v is best solution. I have several questions,
Q1. Is it possible to limit traffic or bandwidth for hyper-v windows vps? And is there any web GUI that can be provided to the users to manage their VPS, e.g. check the traffic had been used.
Q2. About windows license, I heard that If I run a Windows DataCenter version in the main node, then I do not need license for the vps. Does it mean when I install the windows 2003 as a guest, it will no longer require us to input the CD-KEY?
ive just installed Hyper VM using the download from the hypervm site, but a quick question i have is, is there a way of getting more than 5 VPS's on the server, i can't seem to find it anywhere.
According to the documentation, Hyper-V VMs cannot boot from SCSI drives and requires an IDE drive for each virtualization. I'm new to Windows (Server 2008) and Hyper-V and planning out some hardware.
Does anyone know if it is possible to:
Set up the the server with 2 SATA Drives (Raid 1), along with 8 x Ultra320 SCSI Drives (Raid 5 or 6).
Load the OS and set up all Virtual slices on the SATA drives, so that that virtual boot sectors are on the IDE drives, but the main bulk of the clients allotted space on the SCSIs? Is there issue with that and if so, how do you manage that?
Anyone aware of some good Hyper-V hosting? I must say I'm really sick and tired of Virtuozzo. Its a pain in my butt! I'd even take some VMWare or Xen hosting - just none of this fake virtualization stuff...there are way too many limits (e.g. I want to update my own core!).
Does anyone know if it is possible to monitor bandwidth for individual virtual environments within Hyper-V? I'm looking for an economical way of doing this, not through System Center. we're looking to provision a few Windows virtual environments over the next few weeks and want to see if there is an alternative to Parallels Virtuozzo.
With Virtuozzo, there is the panel to restart the vps and view bandwidth and server resources etc.
For Hyper-V what is there for me, a customer of the service. ie hosts are telling me they dont have a control panel - so how could I restart the hyper-v should the OS crash?
I'd really like to find a Hyper-V VPS provider (or a Xen/ESX provider) and I've been stunned thus far to see each provider charging more for Hyper-V than Virtuozzo (e.g.
VPSland and Crystal Tech.). Why does this surprise me? Well, Hyper-V is included with the OS, whereas Virtuozzo is an extra cost. You might say, "But yeah, Virtuozzo gets around having to have a separate license for each OS install since its actually just one OS." Actually, that's not true, Microsoft clarified their licensing position and said that each instance does need a license. I'm guessing most hosting providers know this...So why the price hike?
We have a few single CPU (54xx quad core)systems running Hyper-V and looking at the Hyper-V Logical Processer Total value in Perfmon its staying pretty much from 85% to 100% all day long. Perfomance is mostly ok with an occasional hesitation, but the biggest reason is we are trying to avoid doubling the cost of SPLA license by not adding the second CPU. Most motherboards we have only hold 16 gig to 24 gig memory and by adding a second CPU both will probably be less then 40% or 50%
Any problems keeping a 54xx or any CPU for that matter running flat out as long as its cooled OK?
Without any fanfare, at the beginning of September, Parallels released Virtuozzo Containers (formerly Virtuozzo) 4.5.
Version 4, launched in January, unified for the first time the Windows and Linux branches, introducing major new features like virtual SMP masking and support for Microsoft and Red Hat cluster services.
Version 4.5, which is built on this new architecture, brings in a wire range of new capabilities:
Support for Windows Server 2008 (32/64bit, with or without Hyper-V, up to Service Pack 1) and its new Failover Clustering
Support for Hyper-V (it’s not exactly clear if this just means that the Hyper-V parent partition can be segmented in containers, or something else)
Support for TCP/IP Offload Engine (TOE) NICs inside the containers
Support for new 3rd party backup and anti-virus solutions (including the ones provided by AVG, CA, EMC, IBM, McAfee, Symantec and F-Secure)
Support for iSCSI inside the containers (a container can be an Initiator)
Support for IPv6 addresses inside the containers
It’s not entirely clear why Parallels didn’t promote in any way what is still considered its flagship product. It is true that the large majority of the attention is focused on hardware virtualization, but the company OS virtualization platform should still have a competitive advantage over VMware, Citrix and Microsoft hypervisors in the hosting industry, which is well worth some more marketing effort.
We are wondering why Parallels haven't been shouting from the rooftops. This is a game changer.
I currently have a server (Xeon 1x5310, 4gb RAM, 4x500gb hdd in Raid 10) with Windows 2003. Now do to a project I'm looking at installing Windows 2008 and upgrading to 2x5310 and 16gb of RAM on my server.
I'm looking to create a virtualized test environment for development of a new web service I'm working on. What I'm looking to develop right now is 2 file servers, 3 web servers, 3 MS SQL database servers and 1 DNS server (would prefer but not sure if hardware can handle it. Virtualization would be ideal as this is very similar to what we believe will we have when we launch the service.
I have a few questions I'm hoping you might be able to answer:
1) With the upgraded hardware specs, should it be able to handle the load if I assign each virtual entity 1 core with 2gb of RAM each?
2) I would like to create each of the multiple servers in a cluster (ie cluster of webservers) as this is how it will be in production. But, I've never worked with clusters before so:
a) where can I learn about clustering windows 2008 servers?
b) is this possible to do in a virtualized environment?
3) How does MS work the licensing? I want to have each server running Windows 2008 and 2-3 of them running SQL Server 2005.
a) Do they charge extra for each virtualized server?
b) Does this mean I have to purchase 3 complete copies of SQL Server or is there a way I can pay a low license fee for use in a non-commercial, non-production environment?
4) Does anyone see any problems with this setup or have any suggestions for me?
* I do have money available to spend on a good solution, so if you have suggestions that cost please let me know. I just thought virtualization would be the way to go as the project will be in development for at least a year with no public access.
** I realize that Hyper-V hasn't been released yet (that I know of) so information on it might be limited
I have an account that is going from a shared hosting account to a dedicated with theplanet and I want to transfer it. Concerns I have is that the site is using an SSL. What things do I need to watch out for when transferring. Since I don't have root access I will have to do this transfer with the account function, correct?
This site has a database and SSL, so I thought it would hopefully be easier to use the cpanel account migration tool
I use shared web hosting service to get my website online. I'm wondering how many people use dedicated servers or virtual private servers instead and pay from $20 to several hundreds of dollars? Will I face any big problem with shared web hosting package which makes me choose dedicated servers?
What would you classify this as? Seems like it's the in-between for VPS and dedicated with completely reserved resources and much higher storage capacities than VPS can offer.
Personally, if it runs a hypervisor or container is a VPS but this sure does blur the lines a bit.
I am currently using a shared hosting but due to increasing traffic and server load my existing host is not able to provide reliable services and I am planning to upgrade my hosting service.
While I was searching for Dedicated Servers, I learnt about Virtual Dedicated Servers but I am not very sure about their reliability? Are Virtual Dedicated Servers useful? My website current serves over 2500-3000 visitors a day resulting in 30,000 pageviews and I am expecting the traffic to grow by atleast 2 folds in the next few months as I start some PPC campaigns and Email Marketing for my website. Can a Virtual Dedicated Server cater such needs assuming my website to be more of less dynamic website written in php?
I'm running a Joomla site with about 15,000 page views/day on JaguarPC at present. Its a mainly passive content - no message boards or applications. They disabled my site stating that CPU/Database use is too much. Should I move to a VPS or Dedicated server now ? Budget range $50-75/month.
I am tossing around the idea of moving from my dedicated server to a VPS server. This is due to my ever growing server needs.
Currently, I use a small percent of a $400 softlayer server, about 500gig disk space and 2tb bandwidth. Is this too big for a VPS? Is there anything special I need to take into consideration for the move?
I was also wondering if other VPS's on the same server would slow down mine or if I would just allocated a % witch would be reserved for me.
I have a master reseller account with a host and i ordered a dedicated IP address so i can install a SSL certificate, I have not done this before so just wanted some info.
Its been over 24 hours from when my host transfered my IP to my account and my website keeps showing some other website o my laptop and if i check it on 1 of my other computers it shows the WHM & cPanel success page...
i know i have to leave it to set the new DNS etc but should it be showing another website? and how long does it take to set the new IP fully as my email and website is all offline
