[itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

Tue Feb 10 15:15:18 EST 2009

I am using Hyper-V.  It's very fast and works well.  In the reviews I
read before going Hyper-V, Microsoft's performance now makes it a good
competitor for VMware.  Most critics point out that Hyper-V is still
lacking the live migration features that VMware is famous for; however,
I really don't move the VM's around all that much.

When I was making plans for my new virtualization infrastructure, I
seriously considered VMware.  I finally decided to go with Hyper-V
because VMware Server would only host 32-bit OSes, and their ESX product
(now free) did not support my hardware.  So if I wanted high-performing
64-bit virtualization on my current hardware, Hyper-V was the way to go.

And as for Linux, your only option is SUSE if you want top performance.
Their integration components will not install in any other distros.  You
can run any Linux flavor on Hyper-V - it just won't run as fast as it
could without the integration components.

Paul Phillips

IT Manager

(770) 458-9300 x305

pphillips at walkthru.org <mailto:pphillips at walkthru.org> 

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:44 PM
To: IT Discussion Forum
Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

I would prefer not to virtualize the Terminal Server.  I virtualize
everything else but no the Terminal Server.  It's too heavy of an app
for VM in my opinion.  I know of many who disagree but I stick with that
setup.  I also prefer VMware Server on a separate physical for my Server
VMs :)  If I find the Terminal Server isn't using all of the resources
then I will shift them to the VMware server.  

The pricing scheme for licenses is tempting but in this case I'll pay a
little more for higher performance with VMware Server. :)

Anyone using the Hyper-V server for VMs?  How do you like it?  Any
problems?  How does it compare to VMware?  Is it possible to virtualize
other operating systems with the Microsoft Hyper-V?  Linux plays an
important role for me.  :)

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Dayron Daugherty <
ddaugherty at precept.org> wrote:

With those specs why not build a Windows 2008 Datacenter Hyper-V server
(we went with data center for the reasons mentioned previously about
unlimited virtual instances of any Windows server product) and then make
one of your VM's the terminal server? Then create all other VMs you need
on demand any time ya want. 

For the virtual terminal server you then could use Windows 2008
Enterprise. 

Also someone mentioned Windows 2008 remote apps. I've seen some demos of
it and it's pretty impressive. 

Keep in mind on Windows Data center licensing it's licensed per
processor. For a 1 processor license it's $350 or so. So if you have 2
processors you'll need 2 licenses. However... even for $600... unlimited
virtual instances of all the current and past server products... sky is
the limit.  Of course Terminal server may be heavy on the resources so
you could go with Windows 2008 Enterprise 64 and that comes with 4
virtual licenses. That is only $340 and isn't just for a single
processor. 

After awhile I think you'll see your terminal server isn't using all the
RAM. I'd be shocked if it uses 8GB. If you go the virtual route you
could then create another VM or 2 using the remaining unused RAM. Might
as well build in the ability to use resources vs. looking at all that
unused RAM in task manager J. 

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org [mailto:
discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Thompson, Ken
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:32 PM

To: IT Discussion Forum
Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

We're on 64-bit OS installs and not having any "major" issues. Probably
the biggest issues we've had are with print drivers. We're pretty much
past these now too. 

We've had only one issue with a legacy app - all others (and we have
quite a few) have worked fine. The legacy app was one that was developed
in house several years back but we're even looking at a different build.

Oh, and IE 64-bit has an issue with Flash - keeps popping up saying "not
installed". But, you can install it on the 32-bit IE app (is on Server
08) and it works fine.

Ken

From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org [mailto:
discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thompson
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 11:10 AM
To: IT Discussion Forum
Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

How long ago were you having problems?  Is anyone else still having
these problems on the 64-bit Windows Enterprise Server OS?

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Dan Barber <dbarber at kirkofthehills.org>
wrote:

	Jeffrey,

	We deployed 64-bit on 2003 and had tons of problems. First, many
applications don't install well because they only run via 32-bit mode.
Even though it should still work, it didn't. We also had problems with
IE and Firefox. 

	Ultimately, we killed all our 64-bit servers for TS and went
back to 32-bit. Much better. I don't think I am comfortable at this
point running everything on 32-bit. Maybe if it was only Office and
Windows, but with any other programs (Shelby, for example) I say a
no-go.

	Dan

	From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org [
mailto:discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thompson
	Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:11 AM
	To: IT Discussion Forum
	Subject: Re: [itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

	I prefer to stay with a system I know can deliver.  However
maybe as you experience Server 08 you can share your experiences.  I
expect they will be positive.  I'm building a system with this capacity
because it has become economically feasible to do so and for a small to
medium sized organization I think this represents best value.

	On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Thompson, Ken <
Ken.Thompson at mtw.org> wrote:

	Whew -- that's big. Why / what's calling for a TS with these
specs?

	Also, have you looked into Server 08? The non-profit licensing
for the datacenter version is like $300 and will allow you to build
unlimited (well, limited by hardware) virtual servers on one CPU (we use
quad cores).

	Feel free to talk to us 'cuz we're just moving all our TS's to
Server 08 and have built it all out with all the new features of 08.

	Ken
	IT Manager, MTW

	-----Original Message-----
	From: discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org [mailto:
discuss-bounces at itdiscuss.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thompson
	Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:26 AM
	To: IT Discussion Forum

	Subject: [itdiscuss] 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal Server

	I'm in the process of building a 64-bit Windows 2003 Terminal
Server
	that will start with 16GB of RAM and 2.5TB of RAID storage.

	Which version of Windows 2003 Server do I need to get so My
terminal
	server can address all of the memory?

	Sent from my iPhone

	_______________________________________________
	it discuss mailing list: discuss at itdiscuss.org
	Mailing List: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss
	Web Discussion Board: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss-forum
	Wiki: http://itdiscuss.org/wiki
	Internet Relay Chat: irc://irc. <http://irc.freenode.net/citrt> 
freenode.net/citrt

	_______________________________________________
	it discuss mailing list: discuss at itdiscuss.org
	Mailing List: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss
	Web Discussion Board: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss-forum
	Wiki: http://itdiscuss.org/wiki
	Internet Relay Chat: irc://irc. <http://irc.freenode.net/citrt> 
freenode.net/citrt

	_______________________________________________
	it discuss mailing list: discuss at itdiscuss.org
	Mailing List: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss
	Web Discussion Board: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss-forum
	Wiki: http://itdiscuss.org/wiki
	Internet Relay Chat: irc://irc.freenode.net/citrt

_______________________________________________
it discuss mailing list: discuss at itdiscuss.org
Mailing List: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss
Web Discussion Board: http://itdiscuss.org/discuss-forum
Wiki: http://itdiscuss.org/wiki
Internet Relay Chat: irc://irc.freenode.net/citrt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://optimus.thompsonic.com/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20090210/080996f0/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1664 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
Url : http://optimus.thompsonic.com/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20090210/080996f0/attachment-0002.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2713 bytes
Desc: image006.jpg
Url : http://optimus.thompsonic.com/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20090210/080996f0/attachment-0003.jpeg 