Development Server Setup

[Shimano105]

Ok, we've specced the dev machine (on another thread), what about server-side?

I remember a discussion a while back about using VMWare to host all the servers, is this still the best option?

Would be running a full MS setup for home-based dev projects and research etc.

Cheers.

[HairyArsedBloke]

Ok, we've specced the dev machine (on another thread), what about server-side?

I remember a discussion a while back about using VMWare to host all the servers, is this still the best option?

Would be running a full MS setup for home-based dev projects and research etc.

Cheers.

Is this to go in the shead?

As it happens, one of my low priority tasks is to spec the dev ws(s)/server(s) and this is mostly MS.

I briefly looked at TFS and loaded it on to my old server and it killed it dead and had to go. I've not tried it on my new one. I now use open source stuff like subversion or vault for source control. Have a half-arsed attempt at CI server. SQL server etc.

However, I'm not using any VM stuff. Am I missing a trick here?

The same server is running the business side of things i.e. AD, Exchange, Websites, etc.

It needs to be broken up, but this is going to have to wait until I move.

[DimPrawn]

I'm using Virtual Server 2005. It's a bit pants. The host is Windows Server 2008 64 bit and it keeps losing the network adapter.

I wish I hadn't bothered. If VMWare is free I'd look at that.

In the past I have used a pluggable HDD's to host the OS and so could swap out different server setups onto one machine.

Also, the Virtualization kills performance of SQL Server dead. It's like 10x slower than a native installation. Which means if you are running reports that used to take 30 secs whilst developing you are looking at 5 mins sitting at the screen.

[KevinS]

I'm using Virtual Server 2005. It's a bit pants. The host is Windows Server 2008 64 bit and it keeps losing the network adapter.

I wish I hadn't bothered. If VMWare is free I'd look at that.

In the past I have used a pluggable HDD's to host the OS and so could swap out different server setups onto one machine.

Also, the Virtualization kills performance of SQL Server dead. It's like 10x slower than a native installation. Which means if you are running reports that used to take 30 secs whilst developing you are looking at 5 mins sitting at the screen.

There is a free version of VMWare available..

[VectraMan]

A great thing about VMs is you can make configuration changes and try things out, and then easily abandon your changes, or revert to a previous snapshot.

You can also run several on the same physical machine as if they're seperate.

I run a subVersion server on my Dell XP desktop, and use it to test with different versions of Windows under VirtualBox, but not much else. But I've been thinking I should wipe it, install some 64-bit Linux and VMWare server. Then I could have my test VMs, setup a clean build environment in another VM, and potentially try out other things too without anything conflicting or worrying that I'm going to break something I need by installing some new bit of software.

[digerido]

If your hardware supports esxi I would go with that. It's a lot quicker than vm server as esxi is a bare metal hypervisor - (captain) You have to install Vmware server on top of an operating system which slows things down.

You've probably figured this out but even if you split the services up onto separate virtual machines the physical host could still go belly up. Therefore losing everything in one hit.

If working to a budget just raid the disks and knock up a robocopy script to back the virtual machines files up to an external device, you could then re-import if needed.

[digerido]

A great thing about VMs is you can make configuration changes and try things out, and then easily abandon your changes, or revert to a previous snapshot.

You can also run several on the same physical machine as if they're seperate.

I run a subVersion server on my Dell XP desktop, and use it to test with different versions of Windows under VirtualBox, but not much else. But I've been thinking I should wipe it, install some 64-bit Linux and VMWare server. Then I could have my test VMs, setup a clean build environment in another VM, and potentially try out other things too without anything conflicting or worrying that I'm going to break something I need by installing some new bit of software.

Off the top of my head I don't think you can use snapshots with vm server but it is possible with vm workstation, that costs though...

[VectraMan]

Off the top of my head I don't think you can use snapshots with vm server but it is possible with vm workstation, that costs though...

The VMWare Server FAQ says you can only have one snapshot per VM. Which is a bit poor. Maybe I should just stick with VirtualBox.

[KevinS]

The VMWare Server FAQ says you can only have one snapshot per VM. Which is a bit poor. Maybe I should just stick with VirtualBox.

I tried VirtualBox and it worked okay, except for the fact that it doesn't support 64bit guests (on a 64bit host).. I use VMWare Workstation..

[ribble]

Ok, we've specced the dev machine (on another thread), what about server-side?

I remember a discussion a while back about using VMWare to host all the servers, is this still the best option?

Would be running a full MS setup for home-based dev projects and research etc.

Cheers.

I use a full MS setup for dev and home server and its pretty good. Using Hyper-v on a server with 8gb of ram and a quad core and at the moment it works well and is really stable. Have 2-3 dev instances running and a file server (for all the house media) and 2 small instances of xp one just for downloading and the other for unlimited backup via mozyhome.... Works a treat.

Dan