Physical or Virtual

Hello Friends,
What do you recommend for installation of Epicor 10 on one machine

  • Physical-both DB and App on same server.
  • Virtual- same machine virtualized for DB and App.
    which one gives better speed in terms of accessing the application.

Are you comparing apples to apples? If you provision a VM, will it have the same specs as a physical box provisioned in your environment? Are you using a SAN to feed your virtual environment? As long as you are providing comparable processor cores/speeds and comparable RAM pools/speeds, then drive type and speed will be your next determining factor for speed.

Also, how large is your user base? If you have the ability to roll out in a virtualized environment, have you considered splitting your application and SQL servers into 2 VMs? SQL is hungry and will consume as much RAM as it is allowed, which can negatively affect the performance of your application server(s) on the same machine.

1 Like

These days for backup, restoration, and especially fail-over the best way to go is VMs you can’t beat the flexibility they give you. We use a hyper converged system but a classic SAN and a couple clustered nodes would work well too.

Base your split of SQL and App servers on your anticipated load and if you will be doing any load balancing. We are about 50 concurr users and we run a single box SQL and Appservers with (as far as we have benchmarked) no marked performance issue. Tuning SQL correctly can prevent it from slopping up all your server resources leaving plenty for the host and the app servers.

1 Like

I concurr, it does become a scaling issue at some point, and you have to evaluate your configuration, but up to a certain point you won’t see much different if you properly allocate resources based on your expected usage using one physical or virtual machine for both the App server and SQL