We would like to evaluate 3 different VMS, and we plan on using 2 -3 sites to place the workstation/servers so we can see how everything works and ties back to the cloud.
Vivotek, Hanwah/Wave, and DW Spectrum.
Camera count, will be minimal, maybe 1-2 per VMS, so 3-6 total.
For this exercise I am not worried about loosing a few packets here or there.
We have several sites that run Ubiquiti and Milestone on the same server.
Any glaring red flags?
Running WAVE and DWG on the same server will have issues. You should setup a VM server and host multiple servers. Also, keep in mind connecting the same camera to multiple VMS solutions can cause strange issues.
We weren't going to connect the camera to multiple VMS, just 1-2 per VMS for testing.
I thought Wave and DW on the same server may be an issue as they are based on the same software.
DWG and WAVE can run on one server. Just change the default port for one of them(7001). That's all you need to do. (Of cause under the assumption cameras can handle multiple VMSes.)
Confirming this. did it relatively recently while testing them.
Are you saying all 3 VMSes will be running simultaneously on the same server? Or each VMS on its own server?
If you need all 3 on the same server, could you stagger which VMS is active at a time by disabling the service that you aren't actively testing?
A minor concern would be the ports required/used for remote services, if there was overlap you could experience communication issues.
As far as storage goes, Hanwha and Network Optix create their own folders on the storage drive locations, so there shouldn't be an overwrite/data duplication issue:
I installed Wave and Network Optix in parallel for a short time prior to testing, and didn't see anything out of the ordinary. For our official testing we use separate physical servers for Network Optix and Wave (and all VMSes).
I do not have any experience with Vivotek's VMS, so I cannot comment if there might be an issue or conflict that may come up from introducing it to the mix.
EDIT: I see you answered some of the questions, and others were addressed as well.
If your server has the horsepower, virtualbox or xenserver are your friends. You can simulate everything without dealing with conflicts of a single source machine as a test bench. Once set up it does not matter what VMS or software you are running.
You would alao need to look at what database they use. Some vms use ms sql or Mysql etc. Some databases don't play well if they are already install by some other software In this case you should be fine.
If using MySQL I would port that out to a vm on the net. I have few cheap servers I rent for 5-10 dollars a month for test unix systems.
Prices here: https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/
It takes less than a minute to deploy a ubuntu/centos server most the software already installed. Look at their LAMP install, useful and fast without the set up time. https://www.digitalocean.com/products/one-click-apps/lamp/
You can map your VMS storage anywhere, just don't map it to DO lol.
Why test both Hanwah/Wave and DW Spectrum?
Aren’t they both NX Witness?
Maybe if your using Hanwha hardware just look at Wave, otherwise just DW?
my thoughts as well.... why include two OEMs of the same software in your testing?
I would suggest VMing different instances for each. Is it mission critical to run three systems at the same time versus one after the other?
Yes, 3 VMS one 1 machine at the same time.
Gut feeling is Wave is in last place due to licensing costs compared to the others. It's my understanding they are both NX Witness but they have some differences? We can hold off installing Wave.
The reason to have 2 VMS at the same time is so we can play around with both. We are not as savvy as the IPVM staff so we do not really know what we are looking for. We may get into one and see it does XYZ and want to see if the other does it as well.
Basically so we can bounce from one to the other while exploring and working with support to answer questions.
This is going to be the next camera line we start offering so we want to make sure we do our due diligence.
Basically so we can bounce from one to the other while exploring and working with support to answer questions.
Then, as pointed out by Mike, you need to be aware that some very strange things may take place if you are sharing cameras, even sequentially, among VMSes.
For instance, each one, may or may not (depending on the VMS) reset all camera settings, or just some, every time you connect or at some interval etc.
For your scenario I would strongly recommend separate VMs, or even 2 lowish budget machines. If you are not as tech savvy about some of the underlying components you might mistake resource conflicts for product issues and end up misevaluating the platforms.
Not sure why everyone keeps assuming we are going to share the cameras across the VMS. :)
Camera 1&2 to DWS, Camera 3&4 to Vivotek.
We may just use our normal workstations. All of our workstations are i5 or i7 with 16GB RAM.
I don't see anything wrong with using a workstation for testing. I've got one install running Milestone and 15 cameras on a windows 10 box (quad core Intel i5, 8gb ram). Even recently caught great pictures of two vandals in the building.
I would also like to add to the chorus of people saying to virtualize. Windows has Hyper-V built-in (just have to turn it on) and works fantastic. I run over 100 cameras on a hyper-v cluster (24 virtual cores and using less than 12gb ram) and haven't had any issues. Honestly, I would suggest virtualizing even if it's the only vm running on the hardware.
I know several replies have said the same thing, but to re-iterate: virtualize virtualize virtualize! Create three VMs with identical resources. Even if you're more concerned with functionality evaluation than performance, this may save you a lot of headaches in the long run!
It is a bad idea running them all of the same machine.
I've seen compatibility issues with various VMS programs running on the same machine. Conflicts with Codecs (ex:\ FFDSHOW, FFMPEG...), encryption (ex:\ ssleay, libeay...) and the various drivers used to integrate to each manufacturer's cameras are the usual issues you'll run into. Everyone uses a different version for some reason or another. Port conflicts can be an issue too.
Everyone has said it, but you are better off running a VM for each to sandbox them from each other. It will save you a world of headaches in my experience.
Could probably do it with the new "Sandbox" feature in Windows. Basically a VM/Hyper-V mode accessible from within Windows.
Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.
