Navigation

SEARCH

Powered by Squarespace

INDEX & CATEGORIES:

QUICK NEWS

Saturday
20Feb2010

The evolving story of VMWare (and friends)

Ok, yes I know; not posted in a while! What's been happening? Well, plenty. I've been expanding my knowledge of VMWare, including View and Lab manager, both of which I'd like to talk about in future posts. Also, been getting increasingly involved in storage (specifically Netapp), a subject intimately realted to virtualisation.

I think I finally get the whole 'cloud' idea, as VMWare present it, at least from the point of view of how the concept is presented.

Smart technology like that of VMWare and Netapp really goes a long way to allow your Operating System and applications (workloads) and your data to 'float' atop of intelligent platforms, thereby avoiding the above from being tied too firmly to a specific hardware resource running under that layer of intelligence.

Workloads can run anywhere, allowing them to move around between internal resource pools depending on their priority and category (Lab manager can help here, more on that story in a future post). Or even be moved to an external resource pool running with a provider - and by the way, with VMWare it becomes insanely easy to become.a provider of some sort, offering resource to customers.

As for storage. Well, smart storage that can adapt and protect on the fly can add tremendous value to a virtualisation platform. Netapps technology is a great fit with VMWare. The ability to deduplicate production storage makes a huge impact - the more VMs in play, the bigger the savings there are to be made.

I'll be trying to explain my viewpoints over the next few posts, so stay tuned for some actual activity - yes, watch this space!

Friday
06Nov2009

The evolving ecosystem of Hyper-V

I'm writing this on SquareSpace's new iPhone app, let's see how well it works.

As outlined in my previous post, there's a war on between Microsoft and market leaders VMWare to claim virtualisation market (and mind) share.

So far VMWare clearly have the superior technology, but that's not all they have, they have an ecosystem of additional products that work with the core vSphere offering, provided by themselves, and third parties.

When it comes to VMWare's own portfolio, products like Lab Manager and Site Recovery Manager are attractive offerings, and ones that can sway people toward choosing vSphere, even if they don't intend to deploy those 'additional' products in 'phase one': they'll go with VMWare 'just in case' they want them down the road.

Microsoft clearly see the problem it presents for them, as they've announced their approach for site recovery, and a beta of Visual Studio Lab Management.

These are both interesting products - Lab Manager especially so. As a Visual Studio product, Microsoft are clearly hoping to extend the success they've had linking Virtual Machine Manager to the rest of the System Center suite to this new offering with Visual Studio.

Of course, it's going to be a rinse and repeat operation from VMWare. Expect them to push the same marketing message that the technology is unproven, and 'version one' And they're right. Nevertheless, Microsoft can obviously argue that the bigger their portfolio, the bigger the savings can be for anyone buying into the Hyper-V platform (even if they are only upfront costs)

So, for now VMWare still have the better technology, but surely, they'll have to respond on price soon.

Thursday
29Oct2009

Virtual War!

Well, allot has happened since my last update – which admittedly was some time ago.

In the arena of virtualisation, we’ve had Microsoft launch Windows Server 2008 R2 – which of course brings a host of improvements.  Microsoft are shouting about these improvements, either claiming parity with VMWare, or claiming to be at least ‘right behind them’.

Which one to choose?

It seems Microsoft are effectively claiming their solution is now ‘Version 2’ – and therefore mature and proven.  However, this is something of a stretch.  The technology is version 1.1 at best, and many of the new features added are also unproven and stay firmly in the arena of ‘version 1’.

Microsoft are of course, very good at moving the discussion away from areas where they are weak, and onto areas where they have something to talk about.  Primarily this focuses on high-level features – they’ll tell you they have live migration too, HA too, and load balancing too.  They’ll also downplay features that they don’t have as being features customers don’t really need (think FT, DPM etc) – although you can bet that when they day comes when they do have those features, they’ll shout about it from the rooftops as if they invented it.

Talking about those high-level features though, is a little like a car showroom salesman talking to you about the Climate Control, Cruise Control and Power Steering of a car – but refusing to tell you anything about the engine.  Look under the hood of a VMWare solution – and you’ll find ESX or ESXi.

VMWare’s competition have tried to neutralise the importance of the HyperVisor by giving it away free, as if to imply that it’s not a big part of the picture – but in fact, it’s the single most important part of the picture imaginable.  It’s the thing that actually does the job of running virtual machines.  If you’re looking at running your business on a virtual platform – you don’t run it on HA, or Live Migration or System Center – you run it on a HyperVisor: ESX or Hyper-V.

It’s still the case that by a long, long way, ESX is still far more well developed, more efficient and robust than Hyper-V.

‘Ahh – but it doesn’t really bring any practical benefits’ – they say.  I beg to differ.  The elegance of ESX is in all the enhancements and optimisations that have been made over the years, bringing about a solution that absolutely will be capable of running more virtual machines per box, and running them faster with a greater degree of confidence than Hyper-V.

Another area of competition is with management.  Listen to Microsoft and you’ll sometimes be forgiven for thinking that if you buy into their virtualisation platform, that you’ll get management of your entire infrastructure as part of the package.  This simply isn’t true.  Products like Operations Manager and Configuration Manager are totally separate products from Virtual Machine Manager (VMM).  VMM on it’s own does not provide anything more than the management of virtual machines and Hyper-V hosts – and it does so in a way that is far less capable than VMWare vCenter.

VMWare vCenter will absolutely give you visibility on your virtual machines – gathering performance data, offering patch management, and for any company with a heterogeneous environment, it just makes more sense to look to more vendor-agnostic tools to get your data.

Finally of course, there is price – well, this is one area where I’ll admit VMWare have a problem.  In the world of VMWare, if you’re looking for something ‘cheap’ – then you better hope you’re only going to be deploying three dual-processor servers.  Three is the magic number, as it’s the maximum number of servers you can have in VMWare’s ‘Small Business’ Essentials and Essentials Plus bundles – and they offer considerable discount over full product.

Even the ‘medium business’ Advanced Acceleration kit licenses you for – that’s right – three dual processor servers.  After that the price jumps up with acceleration kits based around Enterprise and Enterprise plus licensing.

I’d love to see VMWare offer some five server ‘Essentials Plus’ and Advanced bundles.  This would help bring about a massive shift for anyone looking to get into virtualisation.

Then again, I'd also like to see Microsoft competing fairly – the bargain basement giveaway approach they have to virtualisation clearly shows that they are determined to stop VMWare at any cost.  That can’t be allowed to happen.  We’ve seen before what happens when Microsoft ‘win’ a market – they stop innovating, and everybody loses.

Monday
27Jul2009

VMWare to the rescue!

Recently we had a support customer with a problem server - in fact, it was their only server (a small business customer) - and their server was in real trouble!

Originally reported to us as problems accessing certain services (database, email) on the server, with others (files) being painfully slow, we attended site and discovered a problem with the server RAID array - in fact, two of the drives in their RAID 5 array were failing - the only reason why such a problem had not yet knocked out the array completely was that for some reason, the controller was simply trying to carry on, repeatedly attempting to rebuild.  Worse still, the customer had no backup(!)

The server was painfully slow - rebooting took all night, and when we got the server back to our offices for more 'involved' work - primarily taking an image, it took 24-hours to complete, despite only being a small image of around 60GB.  Our imaging process also reported various errors, so we couldn't be sure of the integrity of the image itself.

We pushed on and tried to restore to a 'spare' server we had, which we'd loan to the customer if we could get it working.  It was not the same hardware, and we're talking Windows here - but we were using imaging software that could work around the problems of dissimilar hardware - but our plans were thwarted - we were fought every step of the way, with the server refusing to do anything other than give a BSOD on bootup - numerous approaches to solving this problem were tried, including repairs and re-installs of the OS, to no avail.

Whilst this battle was going on, I opened up a new front of attempting to use VMWare converter to make a virtual machine out of the image.  I'm not exaggerating when I say this; it worked first time.  And when I say it 'worked' - i mean it worked!  Their Exchange databases mounted without a hitch, same too for their main database, all we had to do was reset the IP address and it was done!  From that point, the solution was clear!

We gave up on the direct hardware restore, and instead installed the free ESXi 4 on our spare server, moved the image over, tested it was still working (it was), and then deployed it to the customers site, where it works perfectly, providing a much needed stop gap measure whilst their original server is evaluated for repair or replacement!  Happy customer, and a big problem solved for us!

Could we have done this with something other than VMWare ESXi?  Such as Microsoft Hyper-V or Citrix XenServer?  Well, possibly, but the first problem with Hyper-V or XenServer would have been its insistence on hardware assisted virtualisation.  We've got plenty of 'spare' servers around - but many of them are older systems with CPU's that don't support hardware assisted virtualisation, it would have narrowed our choices significantly, and lengthened the process of getting a spare system up-and-running.  By comparison, with ESXi, we simply had to concentrate on making sure the server had the basics covered - RAM, hard drive space etc - much easier!

Needless to say, we'll certainly be looking to use a similar approach the next time this happens - and VMWare will most likely be our platform of choice to send to the rescue!

Wednesday
15Jul2009

New Article - Activating Guided Consolidation

I've posted up a new article 'Activating VMWare Guided Consolidation'

Guided Consolidation is a feature of VMWare vCenter that assesses the physical servers in your environment to see which ones are good candidates for a Physical to Virtual (P2V) conversion - however many users will find that the feature is not present following the installation of vCenter.  It doesn't appear as either a plugin, or an optional feature during installation.

Follow the instructions in my article to get it activated!  Read it here