locked
Microsoft VDI = 1 virtual desktop VM per connection? RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    I have recently implemented VDI in a test environment with RD session host, HyperV server, RD Virtualization, RD Connection Broker and Windows 7 VM.

    All is configured as per the Microsoft Virtual Desktop Pool config doc however I can only get 1 connection per Virtual Machine.

    Is it possible to get single VMs in this type of environment to be able to serve more client connections or is this not designed to compete with other vendor solutions such as VMWare View

    Friday, February 18, 2011 5:34 PM

Answers

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Do you mean one concurrent logon per-VM? Or that the pooled virtual machines are not reassigned to a second user after the first logs off?

     

    This forum post is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinion or view of Microsoft, its employees, or other MVPs.

    Friday, February 18, 2011 5:57 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Williams,

    The Win7 VMs are designed for 1 concurrent connection (personal VMs or pooled VMs). Once a person logs off, the machine will be free for the next person. If a user disconnects, you can use GPO to make sure the disconnected sessions are purged after a certain amount of time. You can also use Hyper-V to "rollback" the VM to its original state so that it is ready for the next user (ie. whatever the last user did to the VM is overwritten with a snapshot of the original VM).

    If you want more than one concurrent session per machine, then you need to use Remote Desktop Services (an RD Session Host server) for this. Make sense?

    Hope this helps,

    Kristin L. Griffin

    SUPER BIG fan of the Remote Desktop Virtualization Team!!!) 

    My RDS blog: blog.kristinlgriffin.com

    The new Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Remote Desktop Services Resource Kit is now available!
    Friday, February 18, 2011 8:47 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Yes, this makes sense and has the same constraints as a users connecting to desktops via RDP.

    What I don't understand is that I thought VDI was supposed to be thin?

    If memory requirements of a Win7 machine to run well is approximately 1GB, and you have 100 staff, the cost of this gets out of hand very quickly. i.e. a company with 100 staff is not going to be able to afford server hardware to run this in a highly available virtual environment.

    Surely cost wise, they are better off buying a load of desktops (and some spares in case of issues), image them using WDS and implement GPOs to prevent changes to them as desktop hardware is massively cheaper or is there something I'm missing?

    Monday, February 21, 2011 9:09 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hi,

    I have not tried to set it up myself, so cannot say for sure. But as far as I know there should be an option to use one template VM for all users. When a user logs on, a clone of that template is created, when the user logs off his data/settings store in his roaming profile and the clone VM is destroyed. In this scenario your server will be loaded only with few VMs at a time, instead of running 100 VM all the time.

    Take a look at this series, there might be a more detailed explanation: http://edge.technet.com/Media/Microsoft-VDI-Part-I-Server-Side-Configuration/

    сила в справедливости
    Monday, February 21, 2011 10:02 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Williams,

    Two things to do:

    First, when you configure your VMs, you can set them to go into a saved state after a certain amount of time after the user has logged off or disconnected. You do this on the Properties page of the pool or the Properties page of the Personal Desktops section in the COnnection Broker Management console.

    Seecond, you can install SP1 which gives you the ability to implement dynamic memory in Hyper-V: http://download.microsoft.com/download/D/1/5/D15951B6-B33C-4A57-BCFB-76A9A6E54212/Implementing_and_Configuring_Dynamic_Memory_WP_SP1_final.pdf

    Hope this helps,

    Kristin L. Griffin

    SUPER BIG fan of the Remote Desktop Virtualization Team!!!) 

    My RDS blog: blog.kristinlgriffin.com

    The new Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Remote Desktop Services Resource Kit is now available!
    Monday, February 21, 2011 7:09 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    What I don't understand is that I thought VDI was supposed to be thin?

    If memory requirements of a Win7 machine to run well is approximately 1GB, and you have 100 staff, the cost of this gets out of hand very quickly. i.e. a company with 100 staff is not going to be able to afford server hardware to run this in a highly available virtual environment.

    Surely cost wise, they are better off buying a load of desktops (and some spares in case of issues), image them using WDS and implement GPOs to prevent changes to them as desktop hardware is massively cheaper or is there something I'm missing?

    VDI isn't thin no matter which vendor you go with (VMware, Citrix, Microsoft or a cobination); VDI is still one desktop per user - with VDI you can run your desktop centrally which means management is simpler than physical desktops.

    If you are looking for maximum density then you should look at Remote Desktop Services Session Host (or Terminal Services). With RD Session Host multiple users can share a single machine which allows you save on resources such as memory.

    Take a look at these links to help you understand VDI vs. RDS/TS:

    http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/videos/archive/2009/03/23/terminal-services-versus-vdi-brian-s-presentation-from-vmworld-europe-2009.aspx

    http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2007/03/14/when-to-use-vdi-when-to-use-server-based-computing-and-how-the-citrix-ardence-dynamic-desktop-fits-into-all-this.aspx

     

    This forum post is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinion or view of Microsoft, its employees, or other MVPs.
    • Marked as answer by williams101 Tuesday, February 22, 2011 7:26 PM
    Monday, February 21, 2011 8:04 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    I will get reading, thanks.

    I would say though that as a concept it seems strange that the requirements would be so high for so few desktops because even with Dynamic memory, 100 desktops would require 75-100 GB of memory depending on their usage.

    How many 100 user companies can realistically afford servers with this kind of memory to dedicate to desktops.

    e.g. to run 5 to 6 servers with enough memory to meet microsoft minimum requirements for products like exchange etc, they would use around 20-30GB Memory. To make this highly available, a 2nd server would be required and for a 2 server highly available clustered solution, we are talking about 2 servers with around 96 GB memory each (to provide for failover), enough processor cores to cope plus a sizable SAN and switch infrastructure. Most companies of this size will not be able to afford it - they would go with HA and RDS before they even entertain VDI.

    Tuesday, February 22, 2011 2:57 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Williams,

    I kind of think that 1GB of RAM is a pretty decent jump from the normal 2-4 you put into a physical machine. Sure its not nothing, but it is better.

    Also, VDI was never meant to be a replacement for RDS. It is complementary and to be used as for desktop replacement, or for app compatability issues for example. Virtualization still requires resources, though in the big scheme of things, not as much.

    I wont comment on virtualizing Exchange, as this is the wrong forum to get into that, so lets stick to VDI:

    Here is a very rough example: Lets say I have 100 users, and I want to do desktop replacement using VDI. Ok,  I can get 3-4 servers, at about 4.5K each, with 24GB-32GB RAM in them, and run personal VMs. So, 20K or less, I get to bring all my desktops into the datacenter, where they are more easily managed, and can take advantage of snapshotting, and quick replacement procedures, and with the use of Dynamic Memory, the RAM used could be less than I have. Not bad in my book.

    In deed, RDS may be a better fit for you, depending on what you are trying to accomplish. But VDI has its place. This is my point.

    Best of luck on your implementation! Cheers! :)

    Hope this helps,

    Kristin L. Griffin

    SUPER BIG fan of the Remote Desktop Virtualization Team!!!) 

    My RDS blog: blog.kristinlgriffin.com

    The new Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Remote Desktop Services Resource Kit is now available!
    Tuesday, February 22, 2011 4:31 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Thanks for all your help guys, I think I have enough technical information to take to management about how and where this is used... now to convert that into management speak!

    May consider App-V before I go to them with any info.

    Thanks again

    CW

    Tuesday, February 22, 2011 7:25 PM