Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

SNMP is actually deprecated in Server 2012 - have a look at this. You can still install SNMP as a feaure though, so try doing as described on this page if you haven't done so already. Next step is to figure out if the traps you want are actually in the collection of things exposed by the Windows SNMP service. You do this via the traps tab on the SNMP ...


0

Root cause is Virtual Machine Queue which can be found under the advanced properties of your network adapter. Disable it and all problems will go away. I have noticed this issue primarily with broadcom adapters but other adapters may be effected. Thorough explanation to come.


2

Tracing route to vmsp2013.xdomain.local [192.168.1.177] over a maximum of 255 hops: As our good friend Inigo says "I do not think it means what you think it means." That is not saying that it took over 255 hops. Rather, it's stating that tracert will not report on any more than 255 hops. In the output, you can clearly see that the host is reachable ...


0

We escalated the problem up to Microsoft Premier Support and got a kernel debug specialist working on it; he discovered that something uninstalled all Hyper-V drivers from the guest VMs, thus rendering them completely unable to boot; he managed to get one of them to boot by manually injecting the drivers in the file system and Registry of the VM, and we were ...


-1

Export the VM and attached in separate Hyper-V host boot this vm in new Hyper v host then boot and check everything is working fine or not? we got success in our case. try.


0

Personally, I wouldn't do either. Microsoft best practice is to only have the Hyper-V role installed on the host servers, and I don't fully understand what you are trying to gain by having two VMS pointing to the same share on the SAN. Your best bet is to put the file server as a VM on the cluster. Having it on the cluster will provide high-availability, ...


0

There is no problem running a File Server role on Hyper-V hosts. In general, mixing other roles with Hyper-V is not a good thing. However, the File Server role has been specifically designed and tested to run alongside Hyper-V. One thing I suggest doing is using Windows 2012 R2's QoS features to carve out network capacity for your Hyper-V role vs. your File ...


2

Is it possible to run a live machine on a replication target? Yes it is. As for drawbacks, make sure the target host is appropriately sized to run production workloads and the replicated workloads in the event of a failover. The replicated virtual machines don't run on the target until a failover is initiated (by you) so there should be little to no ...


0

HyperV Replication occurs via HTTPS. You should confirm that both machines can reach each port 443 on the other host. If you can't, then adjust your windows advanced firewall. See step 1.3 especially here: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj134153.aspx


0

Not exactly - I don't think you can use the host OS for this. However, you can sysprep your first guest image and leave that alone. Then make new differencing disks, which are like Linked Clones in VMware Workstation. Specify your original VHD/VHDX as the parent. Then make a new VM for each differencing disk. Performance may be poor though; it depends on ...


3

Here's my off the cuff opinion: Having two virtual switches connected to the same physical switch doesn't make much sense unless you're connecting the virtual switches to different VLAN's on the physical switch. That leaves teaming. Do you want or need to provide fault tolerance for the physical NIC's? If so then set up a fault tolerant NIC team. Do you ...


0

Just checked and it turns out switches need to be white listed on the network, so yes 'thewabbit' you were correct the one mac-address per physical port rule. Workaround looks like having to use NAT port forwarding from the pubic IP address to the internal ones - not ideal but should do the trick. Thanks again for the advice, Vackar


-1

After looking more into the event log entry it suggests that DCOM needs more permission to get to solve the access denied message (adding Network Service). See here: http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=563 This solved the first issue. Now in the event log it says: The shadow copies of volume C: were aborted because of an IO failure on ...


0

Well, for one thing, you should probably be using a full-fledged P2V solution for Hyper-V, like Microsoft's Virtual Machine Manager. Alternately, VMware Convertor is something of a standard solution for P2Ving any machine, because it's free, supports most everything you can find to throw at it, and is backed by top virtualization companies out there. ...


0

Did you checked the Event Viewer on the W2008R2 ? Could be due to max TCP connections allowed by Windows: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc759700%28WS.10%29.aspx


0

Yes, that is a reasonable way to still kind of test the storage without taking the cluster offline. You could also skip the storage tests entirely if you wanted to. That is not uncommon for adding more hosts to a live cluster. Of course if you have issues and need support, Microsoft will want you to run the full validation including testing all the ...


0

I ended up logging a call with Microsoft regarding this issue. They told me this behaviour is by design. When the VM is powered off, you can't connect to the console through VMM. Once you power on the VM, you can connect just fine, you'll just miss the first bits of the BIOS boot info. The "error" message is misleading; there is no "error" to fix, really. ...


0

You can open your services and make sure that SCVMM Services are working well.


-1

Software assurance give you the right to upgrade during software assurance life . You don't have to transfer license but request new one. Its in your microsoft vlsc account. http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/ be carefull with virtual licensing . microsoft say : 2012 r2 is 2 vitual + 1 physical references : ...


2

Yes, it will take the load. In the world of virtualisation - in my experience at least - CPU is very rarely the bottleneck. I'd rate (prioritise) the physical aspects in this order: Quantity of RAM Speed of RAM Available disk I/O CPU core count (note, no mention of speed!) Network I/O We have some pretty meaty virtualised implementations (e.g.: large ...


1

There's no reason to have separate storage for each hypervisor. Storage is designed to simultaneously serve data to many different types of clients. You want to make sure it's properly sized to do the job, of course.


1

I have a very similar setup. I found the answer here (Extremely slow file transfers to Hyper-V VM on local machine) With the Broadcom chipset I disabled the virtual queues and all latency disappeared. Make this change on the physical NIC, not the virtual NIC.



Top 50 recent answers are included