Help with running servers on ESXi free version

We have to 64 bit servers that are running a similar Application and various 32 bit servers running Exchange 2003. We need to upgrade Exchange 2003 to 2010 so we are looking at virtualising the 64 bit servers and then running Exchange along the Application on the two servers. I have been asked to look at using ESXi Free version or even a paid version and also compare with running the same setup on Windows 2012 with Hyper V.

Will they be any complications in running App and Exchange virtual machines on a free version of ESXi or am I better of going for the Windows 2012 Hyper V?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Tritium

I haven't worked with Hyper V so I can't comment on that aspect; however, I run all of my client's virtual servers on the free version of ESXi. I haven't really had any problems. I have noticed however, that I had to assign a pretty good amount of ram to my SBS running exchange for it to run decent. On two of my ESXi servers, I have 5-6 Virtualized OS on each. Runs like a champ with the right hardware!

jibbajabba

Bear in mind though that the free version had a 32GB Ram limit (5.x anyway)

JBrown

How many mailboxes are there? How much data? Are you looking into DAG or just 1 mailbox install ? What is the email traffic, heavy/light users? Check out VMware's Exchange 2010 virtualization best practices.

mishy

JBrown wrote: »

How many mailboxes are there? How much data? Are you looking into DAG or just 1 mailbox install ? What is the email traffic, heavy/light users? Check out VMware's Exchange 2010 virtualization best practices.

There is going to be about 300 mailboxes with a potential growth to 500. The traffic will be quite average. I think 32GB ram will be ok because thats how much we would plan to put on the actual physical server.

Thanks everyone for your responses.

blargoe

It's a limit of 32GB TOTAL, for all VM's on the host, not per VM.

jibbajabba

blargoe wrote: »

It's a limit of 32GB TOTAL, for all VM's on the host, not per VM.

Thanks, should have been a bit more precise with my comment