Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization

The testing Epicor did at Microsoft Labs had 6 servers for appservers
with 1 Gbps Connections to the Database server.

I recall this was for 600 users. 100 per server

So it is more of a scaling and availability options.



I run development environments with VMWare and have no issues.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Ari Footlik
Sent: 16 October 2007 15:31
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization



Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
For some reason, my report builder does not recognize 2 printers I have installed on my desktop. I am able to print to that printer from other applications but not out of report builder. This is only happening on my desktop and not on others.

Any ideas on why this is happening?

Thanks,
Jasper



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have been told that the next rendition (8.03.400) is a heavier user of
the server. Much of the processing will be done there instead of the
client so you might want to keep that in mind before making changes


Kersten MacLennan
IT/ERP Analyst
Semrock, Inc.
3625 Buffalo Rd.,
Suite 6
Rochester, NY 14624
585-594-7009
585-594-7095 fax

kmaclennan@...

The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation
More than 100,000 Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered - extensive
inventory now!

The information contained in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you
received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete
it. Thank you




_____

From: Ari Footlik [mailto:ari@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:31 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization



Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ari,



If you are running native OE then there is a very significant difference in
splitting the servers. Native Progress utilizes a shared memory protocol to
access the DB that is highly optimized for a single server implementation.
SQL Server relies upon the schema handler/ODBC intermediary transport
protocol(s) and is more amenable to a server split since it is already
taking a performance hit from the translation layer. In either case,
however, a single server install will always out perform split servers if
for no other reason than that it minimizes the transactional latency.



With the latest CPU's from Intel and AMD implementing the hypervisor in
hardware, the penalty for virtualization should be quite minimal.



Regards,



Michael



Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
<http://www.aspacia.com/> http://www.aspacia.com/

This email, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me by
telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any email and
any printout thereof.




From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ari Footlik
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:31 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization



Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Michael - thanks for the reply.

So far, we're still on Vantage 6. We're nearing completion of our
report migrations, so it's time to seriously think about whether our
existing server will be up to the task. Considering it's 7-year-old
hardware, I'm thinking virtualization, even on the same machine, might
buy us some security in terms of hardware reliability (more likely,
hardware "replace-ability").

From what I understand of your comments, if we're running with Progress
installed on the same box as the application, we're better off than
splitting the DB from the app. And, based on the processor/memory
requirements of our small'ish shop (25-30 users, max), we could consider
virtualization with little impact on performance.

Does that sound about right?

Thanks.
--Ari
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Michael Barry
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:47 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using
Virtualization



Ari,

If you are running native OE then there is a very significant difference
in
splitting the servers. Native Progress utilizes a shared memory protocol
to
access the DB that is highly optimized for a single server
implementation.
SQL Server relies upon the schema handler/ODBC intermediary transport
protocol(s) and is more amenable to a server split since it is already
taking a performance hit from the translation layer. In either case,
however, a single server install will always out perform split servers
if
for no other reason than that it minimizes the transactional latency.

With the latest CPU's from Intel and AMD implementing the hypervisor in
hardware, the penalty for virtualization should be quite minimal.

Regards,

Michael

Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
<http://www.aspacia.com/ <http://www.aspacia.com/> >
http://www.aspacia.com/ <http://www.aspacia.com/>

This email, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me
by
telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any email
and
any printout thereof.


From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of
Ari Footlik
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:31 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization

Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Kersten -

Thanks. I'll remember to ask about that with Epicor when I review our
implementation with them prior to roll-out.

--Ari
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Kersten MacLennan
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 9:49 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using
Virtualization



I have been told that the next rendition (8.03.400) is a heavier user of
the server. Much of the processing will be done there instead of the
client so you might want to keep that in mind before making changes


Kersten MacLennan
IT/ERP Analyst
Semrock, Inc.
3625 Buffalo Rd.,
Suite 6
Rochester, NY 14624
585-594-7009
585-594-7095 fax

kmaclennan@... <mailto:kmaclennan%40semrock.com>

The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation
More than 100,000 Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered - extensive
inventory now!

The information contained in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you
received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete
it. Thank you

_____

From: Ari Footlik [mailto:ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com>
]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:31 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization

Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ari,



Virtualizing Vantage on your older hardware will result in a significant
performance reduction since the processor(s) predate hypervisor
implementation in hardware. The true benefits of virtualization tend to be
garnered by larger organizations who can consolidate multiple physical
servers into a few systems running multiple virtuals or organizations who
require multiple ad hoc servers for testing or development. For an
operation your size you're going to be better off spending the money on
updated hardware, especially for V 8.x, than you will for VMWare's VI3i
license.



Regards,



Michael





Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
<http://www.aspacia.com/> http://www.aspacia.com/

This email, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me by
telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any email and
any printout thereof.






From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ari Footlik
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 9:15 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization



Michael - thanks for the reply.

So far, we're still on Vantage 6. We're nearing completion of our
report migrations, so it's time to seriously think about whether our
existing server will be up to the task. Considering it's 7-year-old
hardware, I'm thinking virtualization, even on the same machine, might
buy us some security in terms of hardware reliability (more likely,
hardware "replace-ability").

From what I understand of your comments, if we're running with Progress
installed on the same box as the application, we're better off than
splitting the DB from the app. And, based on the processor/memory
requirements of our small'ish shop (25-30 users, max), we could consider
virtualization with little impact on performance.

Does that sound about right?

Thanks.
--Ari
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Michael Barry
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:47 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using
Virtualization

Ari,

If you are running native OE then there is a very significant difference
in
splitting the servers. Native Progress utilizes a shared memory protocol
to
access the DB that is highly optimized for a single server
implementation.
SQL Server relies upon the schema handler/ODBC intermediary transport
protocol(s) and is more amenable to a server split since it is already
taking a performance hit from the translation layer. In either case,
however, a single server install will always out perform split servers
if
for no other reason than that it minimizes the transactional latency.

With the latest CPU's from Intel and AMD implementing the hypervisor in
hardware, the penalty for virtualization should be quite minimal.

Regards,

Michael

Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
<http://www.aspacia.com/ <http://www.aspacia.com/> >
http://www.aspacia.com/ <http://www.aspacia.com/>

This email, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me
by
telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any email
and
any printout thereof.

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of
Ari Footlik
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:31 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Splitting DB and App Servers, Using Virtualization

Is there any reason why we might want to split the "application" server
from the "database" server, running Vantage off of two (or more) servers
instead of hosting the entire installation on only one?

Since there is little processor-overhead on the server from the
application-side of Vantage, I think the answer is that it really
doesn't matter, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

This brings me to my next question:
Has anyone considered or implemented server-virtualization for Vantage
8.03, specifically using VMWare products?

I've been looking into the cost-effectiveness of implementing
virtualization, and based on the utilization of the system, I don't
think performance will be an issue. Any thoughts, ideas, or input is
appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have successfully tested the upgrade from 8.03.305h to 8.03.403b in a
virtual environment (Windows 2003 Server 64-bit with SQL Server 2005
64-bit) using VMWare Virtual Server (the free version, formerly named
GSX server). I had no problems.



Can't really speak to the viability of running production in the virtual
environment but based on my experience, it shouldn't be a problem as
long as you size your hardware appropriately for the job.



Brad Feazell
Corporate IT Manager | Dril-Quip, Inc.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]