J
Jimmer
Guest
Hi Libor, It's a brand new setup, new servers, so no pre-existing data. We were thinking RDM because we don't see the advantage of adding a virtualization layer to a relatively crowded environment (around 40 concurrently running databases, though mostly no heavy activity, just bug testing and dev, etc...) since we will not be using snapshots, nor VM replication. Why add a layer and worry about it? Unless I'm missing something 
In all cases, the hardware doesn't seem to have the requirements for adding RDM in VMWare, so we're going Hyper-V with pass through (physical) disks for the databases, which tested fine. Regarding the server bursting up in flames , it is a risk, but we will have to rely on backups of the VM and the .p/.r programs (database data being irrelevant to a large extent). One of the alternatives, since no SAN is involved we can use empty drive slots on another similar server and "continue" from there relatively easily since it is virtual. But then again, for client deployments, if you had the two options (RDM and Eager Zeroed), with no pre-existing data, what would you choose for database, given you want the best performing environment with little to no compromise? Thanks JMR
Continue reading...
In all cases, the hardware doesn't seem to have the requirements for adding RDM in VMWare, so we're going Hyper-V with pass through (physical) disks for the databases, which tested fine. Regarding the server bursting up in flames , it is a risk, but we will have to rely on backups of the VM and the .p/.r programs (database data being irrelevant to a large extent). One of the alternatives, since no SAN is involved we can use empty drive slots on another similar server and "continue" from there relatively easily since it is virtual. But then again, for client deployments, if you had the two options (RDM and Eager Zeroed), with no pre-existing data, what would you choose for database, given you want the best performing environment with little to no compromise? Thanks JMRContinue reading...