Following the same rule from the previous post about Non Converged Network Architectures, let me add the diagram first and elaborate my thoughts from there
As you can see, in this diagram there are only 2 x 10 GB Physical Network cards. This hardware configuration is becoming more and more popular because 20GB of bandwidth should cover most customer’s needs while simplifying the datacenter and reducing costs. However, this architecture does include some caveats that must be mentioned in order to avoid potential performance issues.
So let’s start with the positives for this option and leave the constraints to the end of the post.
This architecture seems really handy right? I can manage almost all my network settings from VMM preserving good Network throughput… but talk about those caveats I mentioned:
Hyper-V Converged Network using SCVMM 2012 R2 and Powershell strength is based on the fact that 90% of the configuration required can be done from VMM. However, we may face some performance constraints that we should be aware before making any decision. As a general rule I would say that most of the environments today can offer more performance than is required but in some cases we will need to think of different approaches.
Stay tuned for part 4!
What is the abbreviation of LM?
LM - Live Migration.
got it i am new here,that is very good