VirtualCenter - best practice with SQL?

[GVM]

Folks

I'm interested in your configurations of VC2 in whether you have SQL combined on the same server (thats hosting VirtualCenter) or whether you have a seperate SQL database server instance that the VirtualCenter server connects to (via ODBC ect)?

I'm currently in much discussion as to whether its OK or best practice for SQL to reside on the same server? We are seeing performance issues with VC but thats namely due to the version of VirtualCenter we are running (not patch 2).

I havent been able to find anything in writing that says do not run SQL on the same server as VirtualCenter. If anyone could elude to this ; I'd appreciate it.

Very interested in your feedback, many thanks in advance,

[sbeaver]

Currently I have VC and SQL running on the same box and are very happy with my resultsb

[esiebert7625]

I don't think there is a best practice, it just depends on the situation. In addition to physical servers you can also run them both as one or separate VM's. If you already have a established SQL/Oracle server I would leverage that rather then installing a separate SQL instance. If you do not then it's worth putting it on the same server. SQL is more disk/cpu intensive where VC is more network intensive so they are complementary to each other. Also without SQL, the VC server is toast so separating them adds a point of failure.

Running VirtualCenter in a Virtual Machine - http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vi3_vc_in_vm.pdf

[aozm48]

We're running VC and SQL on the same box as well, and have no performance issues, all is running ok

Regards

Daniel

[mrcreosote]

Running both on a single box means you can set the instance of SQL containing your VC DB to use integrated authentication rather than mixed - more secure.

[Pcparamedix]

We're running VC2.0 unpatched and SQL on the same box as well, and have no performance issues, all is running ok

[GVM]

Cool

Thanks for the feedback.