Virtual Center DB (SQl 2005 or 2008)

[vDeepak]

can someone justify the fact that what should be best practice for Database for Vsphere?

1. why would we use SQl any precise issue with Oracle etc.

2. Any particular reason for best practice to use SQl 2005, 2005 Express Edition, SQl 2008 standard edition, enterprise edition.

Basically i am looking for hairline differences and justifications while choosing the Virtual center 4.0 DB? Is that no. of VM's , host etc that decides what DB to choose or some other factors as well?

Thanks

Deepak

[Troy_Clavell]

I can't push you either way, all I can say is SQL Express is limited to 4GB, and really shouldn't be used for production enviornments, in my opinion.

I say stick with the vSphere Compatibility Matrixes and you'll be fine

For what it's worth, we run a MSCS SQL Enterprise 2005 64bit for our vCenter, VUM, Composer DB instances

[vDeepak]

Thanks for the prompt reply

But the compatibility matrix only justifies who support who. Its beneficial PDF. But i would be more happy if somewhere i get info for specfic reasons while choosing the Virtual center 4.0 Database type.

Suggest please.

Thanks

[Troy_Clavell]

If I were to make a suggestion I would say use a MSCS SQL Enterprise 64bit 2008 DB Server. However, if choosing SQL, the most important thing is to have a good maintenance plan.

Below are some best practices we follow

http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vc_microsoft_sql_server.pdf

http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1003980

http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1025914

...and the only reason we are/were on SQL 2005 is because the View Composer DB was not supported on 2008 until View 4.5. We will be move to SQL 2008 soon.

[RParker]

But i would be more happy if somewhere i get info for specfic reasons while choosing the Virtual center 4.0 Database type.

It's not a matter of preference its a matter of money. If you have a SQL server already, use that. You don't need a separate database for VC. If you do need a separate instance, VC is NOT high performance, it will be active, but not that much bandwidth.

SQL vs Oracle, that's preference, although I prefer SQL myself, because it's all Microsoft, and SQL 2008 is better than Oracle, but that's another thread..

Go with what you NEED, standard vs enterprise, again that's money talking.. consolidate ALL of your SQL instances to minimize licensing costs, that's how you should approach it.

[vDeepak]

Thanks Troy and Rparker.

"SQL 2005 is because the View Composer DB was not supported on 2008 " This is something that i was looking for for some precise reason why to choose what.

And yes i agree that cost is important factor, do we have any link references where this is documented..somewhat

Comparision chart where cost, performance , specific application requirement for DB is mentioned.

Thanks