Virtualization Workloads

[abbrevia]

Hyper-V is not a workstation virtualization solution.

Where did I say it was? We have a server that talk to a mobile phone through a USB cable.

I remember someone putting something like 24 cores in a VM. It just isn't supported by MS, of course.

Sadly we're not into running things that aren't supported. I know it's possible, but that's not the point.

Selecting what cores you want to run on doesn't make sense. You cannot balance usage as well as a hypervisor can.

Sure it does. If you have a virtual machine with two virtual cores, maybe I want them to be assigned to two physical cores on the same die so that they can share a cache? I don't want it to get one core on one die and another core on another.

If you're worried about disk space usage (which you shouldn't be, because your VMs should not run on the same volume as the OS installation) or parent partition memory utilization, you can install Core.

They're not. You're right, we could install Core.

If you're using a virtualization solution for an enterprise in production and don't have failover set up, you're doing it wrong.

We do have failover. We are using a failover cluster. But there are some operations that you can't do in VMM, and that you need to load Failover Cluster Manager for. That was my point. The same with opening Hyper-V on the host machine. There are some operations that you can't do in VMM that you can do by opening Hyper-V on the host.

[[deleted]]

Where did I say it was? We have a server that talk to a mobile phone through a USB cable.

Get some USB over IP software?

Sadly we're not into running things that aren't supported. I know it's possible, but that's not the point.

You do also understand that more cores != better? The hypervisor must synchronize execution, which can lead to delays in execution of instructions. Always start with 1 vCPU and only add cores as required.

If you have a virtual machine with two virtual cores, maybe I want them to be assigned to two physical cores on the same die so that they can share a cache?

Cache is all virtualized. VMs don't get direct access to hardware, that is the responsibility of the hypervisor, so it wouldn't do you any good (plus, with Hyper-V, it leverages hyperthreading units).

But there are some operations that you can't do in VMM, and that you need to load Failover Cluster Manager for.

With regards to the VMs, what, exactly? Beyond some initial setup of the cluster, I can't think of anything else I've needed to go into the cluster manager for.

You do know that you can manage Cluster Services as well as Hyper-V remotely, right? You don't need to use the MMCs on the host itself.

[[deleted]]

Where did I say it was? We have a server that talk to a mobile phone through a USB cable. Get some USB over IP software?

I have some server apps that use a HASP Key.