Speeding up VM for Lab

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Speeding up VM for Lab

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#166361 10-Mar-2015 23:30

Hi.

I have a i5, 16GB, with 2x2TB Sata Black drives which I run a variety of virtual machines on. (Hyper-V Core 2012)

I wouldn't mind speeding up the VM's somewhat and wondering on the most cost efficient way of doing it. Given disks are likely the bottleneck could I use a small SSD as a cache drive that Hyper-V could make use of ?

Any other ideas?

gzt

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7808

Lifetime subscriber

#1255067 11-Mar-2015 00:02

How many at the same time? Currently meeting the med reccomemded ram requirements for those machines? Physical ram configuration optimum? (Channels)

But ssd will reduce start/pause/snapshot times for sure if that is the main issue.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1255069 11-Mar-2015 00:04

gzt: How many at the same time? Currently meeting the med reccomemded ram requirements for those machines? Physical ram configuration optimum? (Channels)

But ssd will reduce start/pause/snapshot times for sure if that is the main issue.

Yah I have enough resources for what I am doing. Thing is I am rebooting a LOT and also snapshoting, but I am not prepared to buy a 1TB SSD, I was hoping I could buy a 64/120GB one and use it as a cache, but unsure how/what to do in Hyper-V to get the guests making use of it.

chevrolux

4962 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2638
Inactive user

#1255108 11-Mar-2015 08:53

Not sure how Hyper-V differs go VMware but I run 256GB SSD to install all my main OS's on to and then just use spinning disks where I need more space.
Very fast. Snapshots seem to take about a minute or so depending on the size of the VM - normall just 16GB Ubuntu or CentOS instances.

wasabi2k

2102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 860

#1255117 11-Mar-2015 09:22

In short, no.

If you want the performance you will need to buy a large SSD. Alternatively - have your VM OS disks on SSD and split out data to another drive on SATA.

Sub Lun Tiering (moving hot blocks between tiers) is an array level tech.

timmmay

20857 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5349

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1255123 11-Mar-2015 09:33

I know RAM is generally the limitation with VMs - leaving some room for a disk cache too. 4GB per OS is probably the minimum, 8GB would be better, for the host and guests. Leave an extra 4-8GB free as disk cache. 32 - 64GB RAM could be beneficial.

Agree that manual partitioning might be best - put your core OS/programs into a VM on an SSD then data elsewhere on SATA or a different VM. Depends what you're doing really.

gzt

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7808

Lifetime subscriber

#1255175 11-Mar-2015 10:23

networkn:
gzt: How many at the same time? Currently meeting the med reccomemded ram requirements for those machines? Physical ram configuration optimum? (Channels)

But ssd will reduce start/pause/snapshot times for sure if that is the main issue.

Yah I have enough resources for what I am doing. Thing is I am rebooting a LOT and also snapshoting, but I am not prepared to buy a 1TB SSD, I was hoping I could buy a 64/120GB one and use it as a cache, but unsure how/what to do in Hyper-V to get the guests making use of it.

You can use the ssd as the smartpaging cache location for your virtual machines.

But the thing is.. the fact that smartpaging is required to get a good restart indicates not enough fixed ram is assigned (or in dynamic configuration — available).

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

gzt

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7808

Lifetime subscriber

#1256145 11-Mar-2015 10:47

Aside from the ram, asigning physical drive for each (or critical) machine instead of using a file is an option if you have spare disks and the box to hold them.

But agree with timmay it does help to know a bit more about how the machines are used to pick the optimum configuration. If there is not much data then host everything on the ssd and snap to the other drives, or try vice versa to start with.

Moving things to different disks and reconfiguring for different scenarios to get best performance is not unusual. Like if you have one machine doing a lot of disk work move that to ssd for the day or give it its own drive, divide high use machines between disks, etc

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256160 11-Mar-2015 10:50

gzt: Aside from the ram, asigning physical drive for each (or critical) machine instead of using a file is an option if you have spare disks and the box to hold them.

But agree with timmay it does help to know a bit more about how the machines are used to pick the optimum configuration. If there is not much data then host everything on the ssd and snap to the other drives, or try vice versa to start with.

Moving things to different disks and reconfiguring for different scenarios to get best performance is not unusual. Like if you have one machine doing a lot of disk work move that to ssd for the day or give it its own drive etc.

Yah because it's a lab I was wanting to avoid the cost of a large SSD, but it seems I need to pick performance or cost at this stage, so I'll have a think about it.

Thanks for your responses.

FYI these are Windows Server and Windows Workstation machines, relatively light load, just a bit of app and design troubleshooting.

It's not unbearable, just used to machines with SSD's and using machines with traditional disks is so slow by comparison.

timmmay

20857 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5349

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256166 11-Mar-2015 11:00

Why would you need 1TB SSD? A windows install can be as "small" as 20GB, unless you have loads of data.

640kb should be enough for anyone...

gzt

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7808

Lifetime subscriber

#1256186 11-Mar-2015 11:18

Physical disk instead of file is one way to get around that, but also I'd be surprised if you have enough ram in that box. It really does seem low for that purpose.

Btw do try out VMware esxi (free) sometime. I think you will find it a better performer in this scenario.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1256195 11-Mar-2015 11:29

timmmay: Why would you need 1TB SSD? A windows install can be as "small" as 20GB, unless you have loads of data.

640kb should be enough for anyone...

you can even have multiple diff disks running off 1 parent, so could even get say 10 Windows Server VMs in 40GB

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256196 11-Mar-2015 11:30

nathan:
timmmay: Why would you need 1TB SSD? A windows install can be as "small" as 20GB, unless you have loads of data.

640kb should be enough for anyone...

you can even have multiple diff disks running off 1 parent, so could even get say 10 Windows Server VMs in 40GB

I'd be keen to see how that is done. Do you have a link?

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256198 11-Mar-2015 11:33

I'm just gonna bite the bullet and buy a 250GB SSD.
I have 6 GB memory in each of the guest servers and 4 for workstations. They have little or no extras on them, it's just testing stuff.

I do wish MS would allow you to designate installs as "lab" as a partner and have them for 12 months before having to reinstall. It's a ROYAL PITA running "demo" software.

JWR

821 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 272

#1256220 11-Mar-2015 11:59

networkn: I'm just gonna bite the bullet and buy a 250GB SSD.
I have 6 GB memory in each of the guest servers and 4 for workstations. They have little or no extras on them, it's just testing stuff.

I do wish MS would allow you to designate installs as "lab" as a partner and have them for 12 months before having to reinstall. It's a ROYAL PITA running "demo" software.

I think that would be the quickest, easiest fix to improve performance. It makes quite a difference over the sort of disks you are currently running.

Also, might be worth playing around with dynamic memory to make sure you don't use up too much RAM in the host. You can lower the memory weighting in VM guests that are less interactive.