Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

    I have been asked an interesting question; is it better to have few larger esx hosts or more smaller hosts??? i.e. hypothetically, would 3 hosts carrying 4 quad cores and 256 GB Ram be better or worse than 6 hosts with 2 quad cores and 128 GB?
    Any thought would be appreciated.

  • #2
    Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

    In general you run first out of memory, the out of io, and last out of processor power. So it all depends on the load you put on the hosts.
    gerth

    MCITP sa, ea & va, [email protected]

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

      I am looking at an overview regarding the basic host structure. I.e. assuming average VM usage across a large number of VM's (100+) the host capacity in my scenario is exactly the same just split between 6 or 3 hosts. In other words, the cluster in both cases will have the same capacity for running out of resource, but is there any reasoning for having more or less hosts to handle this capacity.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

        You need to give an indication of your VM usage too

        There appears to be a capacity calculator that may help you:
        http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...meta=&aq=f&oq=
        Tom Jones
        MCT, MCSE (2000:Security & 2003), MCSA:Security & Messaging, MCDBA, MCDST, MCITP(EA, EMA, SA, EDA, ES, CS), MCTS, MCP, Sec+
        PhD, MSc, FIAP, MIITT
        IT Trainer / Consultant
        Ossian Ltd
        Scotland

        ** Remember to give credit where credit is due and leave reputation points where appropriate **

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

          It really depends. If you have a 256Gb RAM guest you need to run, you need the heavyweight host.
          In general, I'd go for the more hosts with less resources, especially since the "small" hosts you described are pretty serious on their own.

          This might require more rack space and more power, but it provides more redundancy, possibly better storage access performance (more HBAs), and finer grained cluster-wide resource distribution
          Real stupidity always beats Artificial Intelligence (c) Terry Pratchett

          BA (BM), RHCE, MCSE, DCSE, Linux+, Network+

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

            There is also a pricing issue to consider -- as your hosts get larger, the price goes up more rapidly (J curve)
            You want to hit the sweet spot of the best performance before the price starts shooting up
            Tom Jones
            MCT, MCSE (2000:Security & 2003), MCSA:Security & Messaging, MCDBA, MCDST, MCITP(EA, EMA, SA, EDA, ES, CS), MCTS, MCP, Sec+
            PhD, MSc, FIAP, MIITT
            IT Trainer / Consultant
            Ossian Ltd
            Scotland

            ** Remember to give credit where credit is due and leave reputation points where appropriate **

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Few large hosts or many smaller hosts

              Cheers for the input guys

              Comment

              Working...
              X