P2V: Multiple Partitions per server

Hey guys,

So nearly every one of my P2V's to date have been with servers with one drive, do I need to do anything special other than make sure I have the right amount of space for the server, when I P2V a server such as say a file server that has 5 partitions on a 1.3 TB RAID 5 array? - like if I P2V the server for the ESXi host and the space is set aside will the partitions follow?

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

joelsfood

If you leave the P2V as default, VMDKs will mirror the existing physical drives. You might want to go into advanced settings and split those 5 partitions into 5 separate VMDKs. YMMV

Deathmage

joelsfood wrote: »

If you leave the P2V as default, VMDKs will mirror the existing physical drives. You might want to go into advanced settings and split those 5 partitions into 5 separate VMDKs. YMMV

Koodos!

jibbajabba

One thing to keep in mind, unless VMWare changed it in the last version, GPT disks aren't supported, which at your size I can imagine they are.

jibbajabba

Oh wow, seems like 5.1 onwards supports it. That only took them half an eternity.

dave330i

jibbajabba wrote: »

Oh wow, seems like 5.1 onwards supports it. That only took them half an eternity.

I believe P2V gets less love than VUM, and VUM is the red-headed step child.

Deathmage

jibbajabba wrote: »

Oh wow, seems like 5.1 onwards supports it. That only took them half an eternity.

Guessential it's time to whip out the VCP6-DCV pre-order and get recertified.

Deathmage

dave330i wrote: »

I believe P2V gets less love than VUM, and VUM is the red-headed step child.

How so, I have no problem with VUM?

dave330i

Deathmage wrote: »

How so, I have no problem with VUM?

Try designing a distributed deployment.

Deathmage

dave330i wrote: »

Try designing a distributed deployment.

I take VUM only works with a single vcenter cluster not multiple? - is that what I gather?

dave330i

Deathmage wrote: »

I take VUM only works with a single vcenter cluster not multiple? - is that what I gather?

VUM and vCenter have a 1:1 relationship. There's no reason for such a setup (other than old design). Now try pushing updates from a centralized VUM to distributed ESXi hosts across an unreliable WAN.

Deathmage

dave330i wrote: »

VUM and vCenter have a 1:1 relationship. There's no reason for such a setup (other than old design). Now try pushing updates from a centralized VUM to distributed ESXi hosts across an unreliable WAN.

people still use dial-up/ISDN? - I mean it works for site-to-site replication in AD (kind-of) but I take-it it falls horribly in VMware?

However if that's a yes, that seem more like a poor design and not setting up a reliable WAN connection and/or a opposite facing cluster with VUM if the WAN is indeed unreliable, as stated above AD is a bit more forgiving for unreliable links in sites and services but only if those 'distant' sites aren't having many site changes ie static DNS records. There is certain limitations to having a hub-n-spoke topology for centralized VM clusters. But this is good to know for future situation.

dave330i

Think globally. vCenter & VUM in US and ESXi host in some 3rd world nation.

Deathmage

dave330i wrote: »

Think globally. vCenter & VUM in US and ESXi host in some 3rd world nation.

eeek.....