Exchange 2010 on VM RRS feed

  • Question

  • Is there a true benefit to running Exchang 2010 on Vm? I can see running the CA and MH.

    We are considering upgrading to Ex2010. Currently we are moving any systems that the hardware is getting to be EOL to VM. With our 2003 servers, we still have all physical servers for the roles. BE and FE. With 7k ( 2300 on each )users and connected to an XIV tier 2 storage I believe, would it make more sence to just use physical database servers and virtual CA and MH servers.

    I am guessing the DAG would end up on the XIV.

    Is anyone finding this to be the case or are you moving everything to VM.




    Sunday, February 27, 2011 9:39 PM


All replies

  • Hi Paul

    For the most cases I am going with vm's for all the exchange roles. I do think that you should do some sizing on your system so you are sure that it will work allright for you. Have you tried the Exchange 2010 mailbox calculator?



    Exchange is a passion not just a collaboration software.
    Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:08 PM
  • I think you have to start by asking why you want to virtualize. Exchange 2010 can run all roles (except Edge and UM) on the same server, even with DAG. So if you have dedicated hardware just for Exchange and you were considering virtualization as a way to carve it up and reduce overall hardware, you might be able to achieve that goal with multi-role servers. Or, you could virtualize the whole thing including the mailbox role. (MS doesn't recommend virtualizing multi-role servers for >500 mailboxes though... http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd298121.aspx )

    Personally I wouldn't invest in virtualization just for Exchange, but in an organization that has a mature virtualization infrastructure it can make sense (faster to deploy  new servers in a big data center, etc.)

    Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:13 PM
  • One reason is the hardware fail over, the other is to make sure we would be using the resources of the hardware. I wish I could see how Exchange 2010 utilizes memory and cpu with 2500 users running on the server.

    Less hardware would be nice.

    I plan on looking for a sizing tool. I had run one for Exchange 2007 but with 2010 and it's claim of increased performance. I want to make sure I am truly gettting that performance and not creating a bottle neck



    Monday, February 28, 2011 2:58 PM
  • I know that HP offers a sizing tool for Exchange; but you could start at some articles as well.

    There is some pretty good information available on technet about sizing with regards to storage, memory en CPU.

    For the latter: check this out http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee712771.aspx


    • Marked as answer by Novak Wu Friday, March 4, 2011 1:47 AM
    Monday, February 28, 2011 3:06 PM
  • Perhaps you could find interesting information here: White Papers: Exchange 2010 Tested Solutions

    Jesper Bernle | Blog: http://xchangeserver.wordpress.com
    • Marked as answer by Novak Wu Friday, March 4, 2011 1:48 AM
    Monday, February 28, 2011 6:44 PM