K Blog

Blogging like nobody reads it is easy when it's true...

Moving from ESX to Hyper-V - Part 1

So, I have my ESX server humming away nicely here -- it does what I need it to do, and I don't have too many complaints.  However, with the release of Hyper-V, I think it is time to move over.

Why?  Is it because I am on the kool-aide?  Dogfooding?  Nope, I just think it will be better.

Put down your pitchforks folks, I'm serious.  I searched long and hard for an unbiased comparison of ESX and Hyper-V, and it simply doesn't exist.  You either get a VMWare or MS bias, which is a shame, because I just want my test server to work as well as it possibly can.  I have (free) licensing for both, and have no problems with the learning curve so I have no real reason to choose one over the other.  There is a perception that MVPs are supposed to instantly side with MS, and I can tell you right now it aint so -- if an MS product sucks at something, I tell them.  More importantly than that though, I tell them why.  So, with that out of the way, I present _my_ comparison of ESX and Hyper-V.  So far, the only meaningful reasons that I have seen for using ESX over Hyper-V are as follows;

Support for non MS guests
Live Migration over Quick Migration
Product maturity
That is it.  Performance wise, I have it on good authority that "there should be no performance reason for a user who is virtualizing Windows servers to choose ESX over Hyper-V", I am yet to test that out, but it was enough for me to have a go.

Now, Live Migration is great, if you are using it.  I only have one server, and Directly Attached Storage, so it is on zero value to me.  That doesn't mean I disregard this lacking feature overall, just that it isn't important to me now.  The same can be said for non MS guests; this is my test server, and I support MS environments pretty much exclusively.  As for product maturity, it is another very valid point, but one that is unimportant to me.  As I said earlier, I had an MS guy tell me it would all be fine, and I am sure I could bribe someone for his phone number so that I can hassle him to no end if it all goes pear shaped.

The problems I have had with ESX are pretty low.  First, I have had a few issues with VMDKs becoming corrupted.  I am not saying this couldn't happen in Hyper-V as well, but it sure took some of the shine off what I was expecting to be my love-affair with ESX.  The solution was usually always a host reboot (and/or some VMDK tools) but it really took away from the whole "realiability" angle I expected (I have one of these in production as well, and it is never fun rebooting 8 servers at once...).  Second, ESX had some unwieldy ways of doing things.  Moving ISOs from a workstation to the host took AGES, it was so bad that I would try and line up a few at once and do it overnight (this was using FastSCP - apparently the quick way of doing it).  Third was supportability, I had a stack of problems using a HP LTO3 drive attached to an ESX host that were a bear to fix.  Way more importantly, Microsoft do not currently support Exchange server in a virtualized environment (edit; I believe this is changing now).  Finally, it can be a bit of a pig to the linux unskilled.  Changing an IP address is usually answer with "reinstall ESX".  It sounds a whole lot worse than it actually is, but it is still something that I never liked (add to that, USB was a big ugly grey area).

So, my hope for Hyper-V is that I will a) have much faster access to moving things on and off the server, b) a similar speed to do everything I normally did on ESX (I have setup performance counters for seven days on my server, and I will compare them with identically configured servers on Hyper-V), selfishly c) something worthwhile to write about.

Down to planning for the actual move.

Currently, I have two critical production servers; DC-01, my Windows 2003R2 x32 DC/DNS/DHCP and EX-01, my Exchange 2003 server.  These must make it over perfectly, so I am going to spend the most time on them.  Additionally, I have a few less important servers; two CRM servers (CRM-01 and DB-01 (CRM3x32 and CRM4x64 respectively)) and an Exchange 2007 server that I was planning to migrate to (and had started...).  Everything else was test only, and for my sanity, will be skipped.  There is also a huge collection of ISOs that I don't want to have to transfer again - If I can keep them, great.

I am torn on the best approach; ideally I want to do as many different methods as possible to show what works best, practically I want to do as little work as possible to get it done.  That said, I mainly just want my mail back up and running - anything else is a bonus.  Currently, the server has two RAID5 arrays which means I may be able to move everything to the secondary array, install Hyper-V on the primary and then somehow get data back over.  So, I am going for a multi-pronged attack which will look something like this;

  1. Move all ISOs to secondary array
  2. Configure another machine on the network to receive mail while the Exchange server is down (which I will publish shortly)
  3. File backup of EX-01 (I have *never* done a backup of my Exchange server (as a proof of concept for "ultimate disaster recovery", more on that later) so I have a stack of transaction logs - I want to back all of this up exactly as it is, so that I can test it later if I need/want to.
  4. NTBackup of DC-01 and EX-01 - moving the BKF files over to a workstation off the server, this is my "Plan Z"
  5. Acronis Image of both servers to a virtual disk, which will then be copied over the network to a workstation
  6. Shutdown the servers and move all the VMDK files to the secondary array, and to a separate workstation - there is a tool which will convert the VMDK files straight over to VHD here <<LINK>>.  I am concerned about it, as "allegedly" Hyper-V does not support SCSI disks, and ESX does not support IDE.  Fun will no doubt ensue.
  7. Format and install of Windows 2008 x64 Core with the Hyper-V role to the primary array
  8. Install SCVMM and try first at a direct conversion of the VMDKs, with the option to fall back on my Acronis images, and then to a more standard disaster recovery.

All in all, I can't see too many problems -- then again, I haven't started yet...

Comments

Andy said:

you obviously have not even played with Hyper-V, so you talk nonsense, I have tried to get even the most basic functions running in an HA config - and it's an ABSOLUTE pain! (that is with direct help from MS)

# September 7, 2008 12:01 AM

Simon said:

Evening,

Be interested to know how you get on with this as I'm comtemplating doing the same thing

Cheers

Si

# September 7, 2008 11:26 AM

Kieran.Block said:

@Andy;

>>you obviously have not even played with Hyper-V, so you talk nonsense

Is it not clear that I am still just planning this?  I have played with Hyper-V, but not with my production servers, just as another host within ESX.

>>I have tried to get even the most basic functions running in an HA config

From the post itself;

"I only have one server, and Directly Attached Storage, so (HA) is on zero value to me.  That doesn't mean I disregard this lacking feature overall, just that it isn't important to me now."

I am not interested in HA at the moment - but it should work to be able to compete.

@Simon;

It will be interesting, that is for sure.  At Tech.Ed in Australia I was doing work with the virtualisation labs, so far it looks pretty straight forward - I also met a guy from Unisys who apparently has a great product for migrating in every combination.

Kieran

# September 14, 2008 5:46 PM

James Avery said:

How are you doing in the process? We have been doing some of this, but I do like further insight on other peoples thoughts.

# October 22, 2008 7:32 AM

Shaun Hedrick said:

I've (literally) just installed SCVMM as well and am going through the same process as yourself.  I'm interested in updates on your progress.  Since I'm running the free ESX at the moment, it unfortuantely looks like V2V is not as straightforward as I would have liked, because SCVMM wants to talk to a VMWare Virtual Centre Server and we don't have one, I just use the free VMWare Infrastrcuture Client for management, so it looks as if I have to manually copy VMDK's over to the SCVMM library server before it will see them and allow me to do a V2V.  Funnily enough, we started out on Hyper-V, moved over to ESX, and now I'm migrating everything back to Hyper-V.  With Hyper-V, you get so much more out of the box for a small price, things like quick migration, and I've even heard that MS have a  'V-Motion like' product in the labs that might come out soon.  If you want all that in the VMWare world, you need to re-mortgage your house.  The free ESX is so crippled it's a joke, and we are fed up with it.  So Hyper-V here we come once again, and this time we're here to stay.  I'll let you know how it goes if you like.

# January 27, 2009 5:09 PM

JaneRadriges said:

The article is usefull for me. I’ll be coming back to your blog.

# June 13, 2009 7:56 PM

Kieran.Block said:

Posts like that guilt me into considering finishing this project :)

# June 15, 2009 7:14 PM

SomeGuy said:

So I guess the experience wasn't entirely positive then?

# July 9, 2009 6:45 AM

Kieran.Block said:

Well, I don't know if I would say that - it isn't through hitting technical problems that has not made me do this, a combination of huge amounts of paying work (ironically, without huge amounts of money) and the knowledge that no matter how smooth this is going to be, it is still going to chew up a weekend that (at the moment) I would rather spend passed out drunk.

I don't really consider the above a good excuse, but I am sticking to it :)

Honestly, I'd like nothing more than to be able to sit down and just get at this, but unfortunately I am unable to do so at the moment.

# July 14, 2009 9:29 PM
Leave a Comment

(required) 

(required) 

(optional)

(required)