<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More Discussion on VMware HA Failover Capacity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/</link>
	<description>The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:13:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: slowe</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-35754</link>
		<dc:creator>slowe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:39:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/#comment-35754</guid>
		<description>Skbl,

Check out this article:

http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/01/07/vmware-ha-clarification/

Which may help clear things up (or not). Despite all the blogging about it, it still doesn&#039;t seem clear exactly how VMware HA calculates failover capacity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Skbl,</p>
<p>Check out this article:</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/01/07/vmware-ha-clarification/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/01/07/vmware-ha-clarification/</a></p>
<p>Which may help clear things up (or not). Despite all the blogging about it, it still doesn&#8217;t seem clear exactly how VMware HA calculates failover capacity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: skbl</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-35753</link>
		<dc:creator>skbl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/#comment-35753</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Interresting article, but I don&#039;t understand what&#039;s happening with my setup : I have a cluster (1 host failover) build with two identical servers, with 16GB each.

As I used DRS for initial placement, there are running VMs on both machines, with memory configurations ranging from 512MB to 2048MB.

So, I should also have 16/2=8 available slots, isn&#039;t it ?
On the first server, there are 8 running machines (and two powered off) and 10 on the second one ( and one powered off).
If I try to poweron one more, failover restrictions don&#039;t allow me to do so.

Strange figures ???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Interresting article, but I don&#8217;t understand what&#8217;s happening with my setup : I have a cluster (1 host failover) build with two identical servers, with 16GB each.</p>
<p>As I used DRS for initial placement, there are running VMs on both machines, with memory configurations ranging from 512MB to 2048MB.</p>
<p>So, I should also have 16/2=8 available slots, isn&#8217;t it ?<br />
On the first server, there are 8 running machines (and two powered off) and 10 on the second one ( and one powered off).<br />
If I try to poweron one more, failover restrictions don&#8217;t allow me to do so.</p>
<p>Strange figures ???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: slowe</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-34584</link>
		<dc:creator>slowe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/#comment-34584</guid>
		<description>Mike M,

I have more than a few customers who want to reclaim hardware and repurpose it running ESX Server in order to reduce their overall hardware costs. In that kind of situation, it&#039;s very possible to end up with ESX hosts with differing specs.

One key thing about this issue--how VMware HA calculates failover capacity--is that it&#039;s not about total RAM utilization. In your situation, if you had two hosts--Host A and Host B--with 16GB of RAM, 16 VMs at 512MB each on Host A, and 4 VMs at 2GB each on Host B, you would be running each host at 8GB RAM utilization. However, VMware HA would calculate failover capacity at 8 slots (16GB / 2GB = 8 slots) and if Host A failed, not all of your VMs would restart on Host B due to &quot;insufficient failover capacity.&quot;  That&#039;s EVEN THOUGH from a maximum RAM utilization perspective you still have enough RAM.

I hope this helps clarify why this issue is critical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike M,</p>
<p>I have more than a few customers who want to reclaim hardware and repurpose it running ESX Server in order to reduce their overall hardware costs. In that kind of situation, it&#8217;s very possible to end up with ESX hosts with differing specs.</p>
<p>One key thing about this issue&#8211;how VMware HA calculates failover capacity&#8211;is that it&#8217;s not about total RAM utilization. In your situation, if you had two hosts&#8211;Host A and Host B&#8211;with 16GB of RAM, 16 VMs at 512MB each on Host A, and 4 VMs at 2GB each on Host B, you would be running each host at 8GB RAM utilization. However, VMware HA would calculate failover capacity at 8 slots (16GB / 2GB = 8 slots) and if Host A failed, not all of your VMs would restart on Host B due to &#8220;insufficient failover capacity.&#8221;  That&#8217;s EVEN THOUGH from a maximum RAM utilization perspective you still have enough RAM.</p>
<p>I hope this helps clarify why this issue is critical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike M</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-34577</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 02:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/12/07/more-discussion-on-vmware-ha-failover-capacity/#comment-34577</guid>
		<description>Good article.  I just dont understand why anyone would build an ESX cluster using hosts of different specs.  Maybe I am fortunate but all clusters I have built have been with a minimum of 2 identical hosts.  I run balanced VM&#039;s on them and each host can handle the full load.  If the VM&#039;s running on host A consume 8gb, the vm&#039;s running on host B will consume the same or less.  It would make sense to me that I would need 16gb of RAM if each host was to have the total capacity needed to run all VMs at max RAM utilization.  Am I wrong?

Mike M
http://www.blatbox.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article.  I just dont understand why anyone would build an ESX cluster using hosts of different specs.  Maybe I am fortunate but all clusters I have built have been with a minimum of 2 identical hosts.  I run balanced VM&#8217;s on them and each host can handle the full load.  If the VM&#8217;s running on host A consume 8gb, the vm&#8217;s running on host B will consume the same or less.  It would make sense to me that I would need 16gb of RAM if each host was to have the total capacity needed to run all VMs at max RAM utilization.  Am I wrong?</p>
<p>Mike M<br />
<a href="http://www.blatbox.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.blatbox.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

