locked
SCCM2012 on a virtual environment RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi all,

    My apologies for the spate of stupid questions I'm asking this week. Obviously I'm researching SCCM for a clients needs and not had a great deal of luck finding clear documentation.

    How well does SCCM2012 perform in a purely virtual environment? We will be running up virtual servers to host it, with databases on virtual servers, and almost all of the client servers are virtualised as well.

    I did see people installing the beta on VMs without drama, however a beta VM on a server with a half a dozen server images and a couple of clients doesn't tell me anything about a large virtual environment with 100's of desktops.

    Thanks everybody

    Jeff

    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 2:18 AM

Answers

  • Microsoft uses almost all VMs to manage 280K clients.  And then there are folks who have failed just getting one VM to work for 2K clients.  It really depends on the VM and the hierarchy design.  And with so many variables that can come into play, you won't find a formula for it.  Part of the appeal of a VM is that you can add to it if it isn't keeping up much easier than you could for a physical server.  To the degree that you can lean on that, the better off you will be


    Microsoft MVP - ConfigMgr

    • Marked as answer by Jeff Whitty Wednesday, May 2, 2012 5:16 AM
    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 3:12 AM

All replies

  • Microsoft uses almost all VMs to manage 280K clients.  And then there are folks who have failed just getting one VM to work for 2K clients.  It really depends on the VM and the hierarchy design.  And with so many variables that can come into play, you won't find a formula for it.  Part of the appeal of a VM is that you can add to it if it isn't keeping up much easier than you could for a physical server.  To the degree that you can lean on that, the better off you will be


    Microsoft MVP - ConfigMgr

    • Marked as answer by Jeff Whitty Wednesday, May 2, 2012 5:16 AM
    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 3:12 AM
  • Thanks.

    Speaking of the formula for it, is there a loose 'recommended setup' paper? For example, do I see a performance benefit in installing the master database on a seperate VM from the master installation, and then on a third VM do the primary site with a fourth VM for its database server? Or do I get better performance installing the whole kit into one VM (first site is only 500 clients)?

    I was hoping to find a whitepaper on it but haven't found much for the current version!

    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 4:12 AM
  • 500 clients, I would install it on all on one VM.

    Kent Agerlund | My blogs: blog.coretech.dk/kea and SCUG.dk/ | Twitter: @Agerlund | Linkedin: Kent Agerlund

    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 4:49 AM
  • Thanks guys, I'll give it a rip.
    Wednesday, May 2, 2012 5:16 AM
  • Apologies if this is resurrecting an old thread, but personally I hate finding threads with exactly my problem and a suggested solution but no closure.

    I have this running, all on one VM, and the performance is flawless. I'm definitely happy to recommend the whole kit and kaboodle going into a single VM for a small installation.
    Monday, July 15, 2013 6:31 AM