Should I install Hyper-V on an SSD?

Question

Solid State Drives

Colleagues, welcome!
There is a server with 4 regular SAS drives in RAID10 and 2 SSDs in RAID1.
There is a task to put on it a hypervisor based on Microsoft Hyper-V.
Question: how to properly dispose of an array of SSD? Is it worth installing the hypervisor itself on it, or just giving it to the most disk-critical virtual machines?

Answer 1

The hypervisor itself has no special disk requirements - it read the files into memory at boot, and that's it, well, rare and non-critical log entries during operation. Therefore, the hypervisor itself can be placed on anything.
But for virtual machines, of course, SSD is better.
For VMs, the disk subsystem is always a bottleneck, and any improvement in it brings a significant gain.
If the hypervisor is not a free Hyper-V, but based on a 2012 server, then you can significantly save on disk space under the VM, including deduplication on the volume where the VM system disks are stored.
On ordinary disks, this trick does not work, because deduplication is, first of all, wild fragmentation and an inevitable drop in performance. But SSDs are not sensitive to fragmentation, as a result we get a decent savings in disk space. A dozen system disks with the same type of OS take up a little more than one space.

Answer 2

Give better under Vm. the hypervisor after how to boot from ram works

Answer 3

I agree. The hypervisor can also be loaded from a flash drive. The main thing is not to write logs on it.

Answer 4

I agree. Disks for virtual machines. Hypervison on a flash drive. And the hypervisor is needed not hyper-v, but a xenserver. :)