Multiple Instances On A VM

David Klee answers the question, when should you have multiple named instances on a single VM?

I am personally partial to having just one instance per VM, as long as the situation allows for it. The resource management area between SQL Server and Windows allows me to manage the overall resource consumption at the VM level, and en mass, managing at this layer rather than multiple layers is usually preferable. I claim that the extra overhead of managing more VMs is worth the resource management flexibility.

I agree with this.  The biggest advantage I see is in licensing, but if your environment is of a non-trivial size, you’re probably going to license the host instead of individual VMs.  Nevertheless, check out David’s pro-and-con list and see where your situation lies.

Related Posts

Oddity With User Write Count In dm_db_index_usage_stats

Shaun J. Stuart looks at an oddity with the user_updates column on sys.dm_db_index_usage_stats: This pulls both reads and writes from the sys.dm_db_index_usage_stats dynamic management view. A read is defined as either a seek, scan, or lookup and a write is defined as an update. All seemed good until I noticed something strange. One of the top written to tables was, based on our naming convention, a […]

Read More

Safely Dropping Databases

Bob Pusateri notes a little issue when it comes to dropping databases: At a previous employer, we had a well-defined process when dropping databases for a client. It went something like this: Confirm in writing the databases on which servers/instances to be dropped Take a final full backup of databases Take databases offline Wait at […]

Read More

Categories

January 2016
MTWTFSS
« Dec Feb »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031