2 Replies Latest reply: Feb 22, 2014 11:45 AM by Thanos A. RSS

    Virtual vs Physical

    Thanos A.

      Hi all,


      I have discussed the following question with many people and I always get different answers. So, I guess that I should also discuss it with you too.


      In a new  Windows based installation with HFM and Essbase, should we have virtual or physical application and database servers. I am pretty sure that the web servers can be virtual but I am not convinced yet that the app and database servers can be. For building the environment we have unlimited resources (sounds good, right?), we can customize and pin the virtual servers any way we want and I assume that 1200 users will use the applications and 500 concurrent.


      To begin the discussion, I believe that the cost is reduced, the maintenance is less demanding  and the DR capabilities are way better in a virtual environment but I am not sure if the performance is at least the same between virtual and physical (especially for Essbase).


      Hope to get some challenging answers,





        • 1. Re: Virtual vs Physical

          Hi Thanos,


              I'm not sure about database servers, but app servers can be virtual.

              What I can say is, this really depends on the requirements of deployment as well as other factors, because "One size does not fit all".


             If you talk about performance of Essbase, its definitely best on Physical Servers with SAN or similar drives, as Essbase requires high disk I/O performance.


          Hope this helps.




          • 2. Re: Virtual vs Physical
            Thanos A.

            Thanks Santy,


            I agree with "One size does not fit all" and I also had in mind the I/O performance too… Have you tested Essbase in virtual server?