Kaseya Community

K2 Server Virtualised?

  • I was reading through the new K2 installation guide posted as a link in Announcements.

    It states that Kaseya must be installed on a server dedicated to Kaseya to qualify for support. One could interpret that to mean that if K2 is running on a dedicated server that is virtualised, you would qualify for support.

    Any K2 users willing to share if they are running their K2 Kserver virtualised?

    Legacy Forum Name: K2 Server Virtualised?,
    Legacy Posted By Username: smbtechnology
  • I highly doubt a vitalized server would void the support since usually what most companies mean by “dedicated” is only run just programs needed for their software, ie SQL and Kaseya on the server, but not Exchange, a domain controller, or some other server type software since it could interfer with Kaseya. Also, in some cases a virtualized server might not be able to handle the load of a large amount of agents since the Kaseya server and SQL server can have a large resource foot print. Right now the only time I use virtualization in house is for test servers.

    The only way sure way to find out is to contact support.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: Chris T
  • I'm running our K server on a domain controller that runs a few other apps and uses IIS to serve our intranet as well as K front end (different SQL server) and support has never kicked up a fuss before...

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: richardprice
  • we are running our live K2 on hyper V now for 4 months with approx 500 agents.

    No problem with K server or support. We have assigned 10GB of mem to K2 server and 4 server cores. Running W2008 X64, IIS7 and SQL2008X64

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: Hans den Boer
  • Suport helped me with advice with best practice on moveing mine to Hyper-v, runs better Virtualised than it did on dedicated box.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: FrankieBoy
  • Chris T
    I highly doubt a vitalized server would void the support since usually what most companies mean by “dedicated” is only run just programs needed for their software, ie SQL and Kaseya on the server, but not Exchange, a domain controller, or some other server type software since it could interfer with Kaseya. Also, in some cases a virtualized server might not be able to handle the load of a large amount of agents since the Kaseya server and SQL server can have a large resource foot print. Right now the only time I use virtualization in house is for test servers.

    The only way sure way to find out is to contact support.


    Virtual servers, especialy Vmware's vSphere is highly capabile to handle large I/O and CPU/Memory load applciations. virtualzation isn't just a test software. We use it in-house for all our production servers along with several clients who exclusivly use it on all servers, including database servers. Whoever says virtual enviorments aren't optimized for production doesn't know what their talking about.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: chimoe
  • Any particular reason why you chose HyperV over VMWare? The little reading I've done on virtualization favors VMWare as being better (better memory management was a big factor). I will be setting up a new Dell PE T610 soon and will have several virtual servers running on it, including Kaseya. Just wondering why several of you chose HyperV? Thanks for any feedback...

    Hans den Boer
    we are running our live K2 on hyper V now for 4 months with approx 500 agents.

    No problem with K server or support. We have assigned 10GB of mem to K2 server and 4 server cores. Running W2008 X64, IIS7 and SQL2008X64


    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: ReedMikel
  • vSphere is a winner for us. The host is very lightweight in terms of resources and requires very little (if any) upkeep. The console is also very polished and feature rich.

    One reason to go with a different platform might be compatibility (AFAIK) as ESX has its own HW compatibility list that needs to be thoroughly checked before making the decision to move forward.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: ed@securemycompany.com
  • Hmmm, I never heard of vSphere - then again I'm a total newbie to virtualization Sad I Googled vSphere and it looks to be a VMware product (so is ESX). What are the differences between the VMware's ESX and VSphere products? Last I heard, ESX was free (unless you need some of the enterprise add-ons). Is VSphere free? If not, any idea about what is costs?

    Interestingly, when I searched these Kaseya forums, this was the only thread that mentioned vSphere. So I guess you might be one of very few people using it with Kaseya?

    Thanks!

    ed@securemycompany.com
    vSphere is a winner for us. The host is very lightweight in terms of resources and requires very little (if any) upkeep. The console is also very polished and feature rich.

    One reason to go with a different platform might be compatibility (AFAIK) as ESX has its own HW compatibility list that needs to be thoroughly checked before making the decision to move forward.


    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: ReedMikel
  • ReedMikel
    Hmmm, I never heard of vSphere - then again I'm a total newbie to virtualization Sad I Googled vSphere and it looks to be a VMware product (so is ESX). What are the differences between the VMware's ESX and VSphere products? Last I heard, ESX was free (unless you need some of the enterprise add-ons). Is VSphere free? If not, any idea about what is costs?

    Interestingly, when I searched these Kaseya forums, this was the only thread that mentioned vSphere. So I guess you might be one of very few people using it with Kaseya?

    Thanks!


    VMWare products are pretty great virtualization systems IMHO.

    vSphere is basically ESX 4.0, so just the newest version of ESX (which itself sits at 3.5 currently IIRC). It has some nice improvements like fault tolerance, better I/O, resource management etc. It is a paid product, has a few versions (advanced, enterprise etc).

    ESX is also a paid enterprise product, but ESXi is the free version. The following link from VMWare will give you an idea of the differences!
    ESX vs ESXi

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: josh.tipping
  • vSphere, ESX, ESXi, HyperV - too many choices for a "virtual" newbie Smile Seriously, can anyone save me research time and tell me if there a clear winner? All I want is to run maybe 3 virtual (2003 or 2008) servers a single server box (a Dell PE T610, single E5530 Xeon @ 2.4GHz, 12GB (1066MHz) RAM, RAID 10 with 4 450GB 15K SAS drives). So I'll virtualize for Exchange, Kaseya (250 agents) & maybe one other instance. Nothing too fancy.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: ReedMikel
  • That link doesn't work - just reports "Proxy error"... I'll do some searching on their site...

    josh.tipping
    The following link from VMWare will give you an idea of the differences!
    ESX vs ESXi


    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: ReedMikel
  • I have been running Kaseya on a virtual server for over a year now. We use HyperV R2. This DOES NOT void support. Support is voided if you have your Kaseya server installed on an INSTANCE that is providing other servicing, such as DNS, DC, DHCP, File Services, etc.

    Our hardware for the KServer runs 3 virtuals, 2 small web servers and then a virtual. Performance is not an issue.

    One thing I will recommend, keep your resources for the KServer local to the virtual. The biggest pain I have had is we use ISCSI targets for the drives, and as soon as the data connection slows down, all that SQL IO will cause Kaseya to slow to a crawl or even go offline. Keep the virtual drive local to the hardware, or run your SQL instance on a seperate SQL box that has a redundant connection.

    Another thing to consider, and What I may be doing for K2, is cloud services. Going to be a unique experience.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: boostmr2
  • Well ReedMikel the simple answer to one of your questions, why i chose to use Hyper-V over VMware?, if you subscribe to Microsofts Action Pack you get all your software virtually free, as long as it is for your own use (business needs).

    so i run Server 2008 IIS7 and SQL 2008 and only cost me 250 english pounds...lol and all the other MS products i care to use within the lisences they allocate for each product.

    Works great for me, hope this helps.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: FrankieBoy
  • Unless you have a real reason for going to a virtualized environment, stay out of it. We were running Kaseya and a seperate backend SQL on a Hyper-V R2 server, but were experiencing all sorts of issue. The biggest was the amount of data going between the K and SQL virtuals kept causing the virtual NIC in the SQL virtual to reset. (This is a known problem in R2 when you have too much data passing through the virtual interface.) Last month I rebuilt my HV-R2 server to a physical and everything has improved drastically.

    If you do want to investiage virtualization, Hyper-V R2 is good for playing around and getting your feet wet. However, once you are ready to go forward with business critical applications I would highly recommend going with VMware in any flavor.

    Legacy Forum Name: General Discussion,
    Legacy Posted By Username: CCDave