Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Thoughts on virtualizing of server running PDC, DNS, DHCP, exchange server, and website

Tags:
  • Windows Server 2003
  • Servers
  • Virtualization
  • Business Computing
  • Email
Last response: in Business Computing
Share
September 29, 2014 12:17:35 AM

I have an old server that's running windows 2003 and is configured to serve as the Primary Domain Controller, DNS, DHCP, exchange server, and website server. The hardware it's running on is old and way past when it should have been retired.

What I would like to do is build a new server but have it be more "portable" so to speak. By portable, I mean to say I would like the server built in a virtualized environment so that it can be more easily moved from physical machine to physical machine with very little downtime in between. I am thinking I could use a windows 7 or 8.1 machine with VMware installed on it as the host and have VMware run the server. A couple of other points to make is that in knowing that windows 2003 does not support running on an SSD drive, virtualizing it in VMware and running that on a windows 7 or 8.1 host (which does support running on an sad) should be a good idea.

What are your thoughts on this type of configuration? Is it a good idea?

More about : thoughts virtualizing server running pdc dns dhcp exchange server website

September 29, 2014 12:27:54 AM

I would personally prefer running a VM off of Server 2008/2012 or whatever the newest one is, but that type of configuration should work as long as you manage the network connections properly and all.
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 2:07:20 PM

Hi Tide (no pun intended) :p ,

I've been doing data center virtualization and consolidation for my clients for almost 11 years now. There are a couple things I just wanted to mention.

1. It sounds like you're planning on using a desktop version of VMware (Workstation or player). These options are great for developers, and demo/test, but they're not intended for running data centers. You'll want to look into something made for production data centers like Hyper-V (available on your Windows 2008 or 2012 servers), vSphere (ESXi managed by vCenter Server), or Xen Server. I believe there are free versions of ESXi and XenServer, but it does strip out a lot of the functionality.

In order to get the most out of server virtualization, you're going to need a farm of 2-3 host servers, and shared storage. There are products now that can actually turn the local stores from multiple servers into a shared stoage array such as vsan, but this type of technology will require 3 host nodes, two to make a cluster plus a witness. Most of the functionality that you're looking for though, will require two hosts anyway. Lets say you want to upgrade your server with a new HBA to attach storage, rather than bring the environment down, you migrate the VMs live off one host, upgrade the hardware ,migrate them back, upgrade the other hardware, then re-balance. There are a couple more reasons why you want to get several hosts we can discuss via PM if you'd like to know more.

Lastly, If you do go the virtual route, suggest breaking out your workloads into separate virtual servers. This way all of your eggs aren't in one basket. It probably makes sense to keep DHCP, DNS, and DC on the same node in your size environment, but I would put the Exchange server(s) and web server on their own OS. If you do have a problem, only one of the workloads is affected.

m
0
l
September 29, 2014 6:03:37 PM

johnny-mac said:
It sounds like you're planning on using a desktop version of VMware (Workstation or player). These options are great for developers, and demo/test, but they're not intended for running data centers.


Yes. I'm thinking about using the desktop version of VMware Workstation. (the server I'm using now is -or rather was- a desktop machine that's been running solid 24/7 for nearly 12 years! Very few problems other than the occasional worn out hard drive or power supply) Since being I'm only a small shop with no more than 10 employees, I don't need to think about scalability in the large sense. I only want to be able to move my server VM between physical machines as needed such as to facilitate replacing failed equipment with as little down time as possible.

johnny-mac said:
You'll want to look into something made for production data centers like Hyper-V (available on your Windows 2008 or 2012 servers), vSphere (ESXi managed by vCenter Server), or Xen Server. I believe there are free versions of ESXi and XenServer, but it does strip out a lot of the functionality.


I probably will have to look into ESXi or Xen Server at a future point... maybe that'll be the next step but again, at this point. I just need to get something up and running with what I have and know currently - and that happens to be VM Workstation.

johnny-mac said:
In order to get the most out of server virtualization, you're going to need a farm of 2-3 host servers, and shared storage. There are products now that can actually turn the local stores from multiple servers into a shared stoage array such as vsan, but this type of technology will require 3 host nodes, two to make a cluster plus a witness. Most of the functionality that you're looking for though, will require two hosts anyway. Lets say you want to upgrade your server with a new HBA to attach storage, rather than bring the environment down, you migrate the VMs live off one host, upgrade the hardware ,migrate them back, upgrade the other hardware, then re-balance. There are a couple more reasons why you want to get several hosts we can discuss via PM if you'd like to know more


Again, I'm working up to the point where I might be able to have a clustered storage array such as what you're describing but that's still a ways off for my current needs.

johnny-mac said:
Lastly, If you do go the virtual route, suggest breaking out your workloads into separate virtual servers. This way all of your eggs aren't in one basket. It probably makes sense to keep DHCP, DNS, and DC on the same node in your size environment, but I would put the Exchange server(s) and web server on their own OS. If you do have a problem, only one of the workloads is affected.


I do have (in addition to my PDC) a BDC which also handles DHCP and DNS. So my servers workload is already divided (somewhat) though I see what you're saying about keeping some of the services separated across different nodes.

In summing up, I know that there are a ton of solutions out there that'll do a much better job than what I'm thinking of. And for the right money, I probably would invest in such technology. I know that VM workstation wasn't exactly designed for use in a server setting but the main question here is CAN it be used in such a setting? As Gene Kranz of NASA once said about bringing the Apollo 13 astronauts home.. "I don't care what it was DESIGNED to do... I want to know what it CAN do!"

Regards,
Tide

PS: "Hi Tide" is the kind of play on greetings I like to see. Glad you got that! That's partly the reason I chose the name many years ago for my online identity. hehe ;) 
m
0
l
!