server virtualization technologies uses comparisons and implications l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 46

Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 268 Views
  • Uploaded on

University of Michigan Administrative Information Services. Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications. David Sweetman Windows Enterprise Systems Admin Administrative Information Services University of Michigan dsweetma@umich.edu. Presentation Overview.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications' - Philip


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
server virtualization technologies uses comparisons and implications

University of

Michigan Administrative Information Services

Server Virtualization Technologies: Uses, Comparisons, and Implications

David Sweetman

Windows Enterprise Systems Admin

Administrative Information Services

University of Michigan

dsweetma@umich.edu

presentation overview
Presentation Overview
  • The What and Why of virtualization
  • Comparing Product Features
  • Comparing Product Performance
  • Evaluating Physical Servers for virtualization
  • Costs
  • Questions
what is server virtualization
What is server virtualization?
  • Creating multiple logical server OS instances on one physical piece of hardware
  • All HW drivers are virtualized – same virtual HW regardless of physical HW
  • Each virtual machine is completely independent of the others and doesn’t ‘realize’ it’s virtualized
why virtualize
Why virtualize?
  • More efficient HW utilization
  • More efficient staff
  • Long-term matching resources & needs
  • Quick and nimble server provisioning
  • Testing & Troubleshooting
  • More effective redundancy
  • HW maintenance w/o app downtime
  • Simplify system imaging
  • Disaster Recovery
hw utilization facts
HW Utilization Facts

Individual ebb and flow of resources

Cumulative usage of 28 servers in the MAIS data center evaluated for virtualization:

44GB RAM, 138.15Ghz CPU, and 1323GB HD

45% of RAM not used 99.9% of time.

25% of RAM never used concurrently.

85% of CPU not used 99.9% of time.

81% of CPU never used concurrently.

68% of hard disk space unused

hard disk utilization

More Efficient Hard Disk Utilization

  • Total: 1323 GB
  • Used: 418 GB
  • Free: 905 GB
  • (68% unused)

SAN in 30GB chunks

1 fibre channel >1 server

Virtual HDs more granular

Share free space – allocate as needed

Hard Disk Utilization
virtualization vs consolidation
Virtualization vs. Consolidation
  • Virtualized servers = separate OSes
  • Consolidation = same OS
  • Virtualized servers must each be administered, patched, etc.
  • Consolidated applications can introduce conflicts and support issues
virtual host licensing
Virtual Host Licensing

Windows and other Microsoft per-server apps are licensed per virtual server. (1 physical server w/ 6 virtual Windows servers = 6-7 licenses needed)

As of 4/1/2005, Microsoft per-processor licenses are per physical processor (1 physical server w/ 3 virtual SQL Servers sharing 1 CPU = 1 per-processor license)

Virtualization savings are not in licenses.

Check with other vendors.

virtualization software
Virtualization Software
  • MS Virtual PC 2004 – workstation only
  • VMWare Workstation 5 – workstation only
  • MS Virtual Server 2005, Standard (4p)
  • MS Virtual Server 2005, Enterprise (32p)
  • VMWare GSX Server 3.1
  • VMWare ESX Server 2.5
common features
Common Features
  • Up to 3.6GB RAM per virtual host
  • Web-based console for administration
  • Host OS sees HT CPU, virtual do not
  • VMs consist of 1 config file & 1 file / HD
  • VMs can mount physical CDs or ISOs
  • VMs can be multi-homed
  • Up to 64 VMs per host server
  • Highly scriptable – extensive API
  • Granular permissions for individual VMs
  • Detailed logging
ms virtual server 2005
MS Virtual Server 2005
  • Targeted to increase efficiency in testing and development, and “re-hosting”
  • Up to 1 processor per virtual host
  • Windows = underlying host OS
  • Only Windows VM’s supported
  • No USB support
  • 2 processor SMP coming soon
vmware esx server 2 5
VMWare ESX Server 2.5
  • Targeted at mission-critical enterprise services
  • Up to 2 processors per host
  • Custom Linux = underlying OS
  • Windows & Linux VM’s supported
  • Dedicated NIC for admin (2 total min)
  • USB support
  • 4 proc SMP coming soon
do i need to know linux
Do I need to know Linux?
  • VMWare ESX Server is based on Linux
  • All administration is possible through web
  • Don’t need any Linux experience for installation or ongoing admin
  • SSH and SFTP access to server
  • Used?
    • Installed backup software
    • sFTP’ed ISO’s to server
managing virtual servers
Managing Virtual Servers
  • Web site is primary interface
  • Attach to VM console
    • Virtual Server = ActiveX control
    • VMWare = separate application
  • Reboot, power on, power off
  • Create and manage VM’s
  • Allocate hardware resources
  • Mount CDs and floppies
  • View recent performance data
hyper threading
Hyper-threading
  • One physical CPU seen as 2 logical
  • Both products see HT, non-HT VMs
  • Slows virtualization performance
  • 1 HT CPU < 2 Phy CPU
  • 0-20% performance increase over no HT
  • http://www.intel.com/technology/hyperthread/
ram allocation
RAM Allocation
  • Virtual Server: Max <= total physical memory
  • VMWare: Max <> total physical
    • RAM Ballooning
    • RAM pooled across multiple VMs
    • Enables more efficient RAM utilization
    • If max out, goes to paging file
monitoring
Monitoring
  • MOM (or other host monitoring): Monitors VMs like physical
  • Virtual Server: MOM Management Pack
    • Integrates into MOM framework
    • Monitor overall host and VM servers
  • VMWare: vmkusage
  • VMWare: VirtualCenter
    • Database back-end across all servers
virtual center
Virtual Center
  • Central monitoring and management in VMWare environment
  • Manage all VMs from one interface
  • Additional software / license
  • Management application
  • Set thresholds and actions – like MOM
  • SQL or Oracle DB backend
  • Assign privileges via NTFS
converting physical server
Converting Physical Server
  • Both MS & VMWare offer tools to create virtual systems from physical
  • Physical HW drivers replaced by VM
  • Ideal for the truly unique server (highly customized)
  • Both vendors recommend loading virtual servers from scratch
  • Slow for both vendors – 6h / 4GB image
  • VSMT (Virtual Server Migration Tool)
    • many prereqs (DHCP, ADS, SQL)
    • Not in one month eval
  • P2V (Physical 2 Virtual)
    • Simple boot CD and ‘server’ piece
    • Licensed per use
vmotion
VMotion
  • Enables seamless transition of live virtual host between physical servers
  • Dynamic Resource Allocation across servers – respond to load changes
  • HW maintenance
best practices
Best Practices
  • Plan out server allocations
  • Create “gold image” – base OS kept up-to-date patches – duplicate for new VMs
  • Use ISO’s for CD access
  • Use standard backup and restore
  • Take system images as needed
summary of vmware differences
Summary of VMWare differences
  • More comprehensive web GUI (for example, deleting hosts & HDs)
  • Support for dual processor virtuals
  • Support for Linux virtuals
  • Virtual Center: central management
  • Easy-to-use physical-to-virtual support
  • VMotion: seamlessly move virtual servers between physical hosts
testing environment
Testing Environment
  • One month each was spent evaluating MS Virtual Server & VMWare ESX Server
  • Identical testing was attempted on each. Load and usability testing: Win 2000, 2003, IIS5, IIS6, SQL Server 2000, 3rd party apps
  • Test hardware
    • 1.4Ghz x 4 physical processors (8 w/ HT)
    • 8GB of RAM
    • 60GB fibre-channel connected SAN space
performance comparisons
Performance Comparisons
  • Automated load test of Aspen 2.5 dev environment (Win 2000/IIS5 & Win 2000/SQL 2000)
  • Citrix / TS load test w/ Helpdesk
  • IIS6-based memory, CPU, disk, and network I/O testing
  • SQL Server add, update, and delete testing
  • Load testing both as isolated server and with other virtual server processing
  • ‘Normal usage’ w/o issue in all cases
performance comparisons30
Performance Comparisons
  • Windows 2003 IIS6 and SQL 2000 perf compare
  • VMWare CPU : hyper-threaded related, ~93% w/o
  • VS SQL : VS 2005 SP1 has performance enhancements
performance comparisons31
Performance Comparisons
  • Previous stats were isolated tests
  • VMs won’t be alone on physical host
  • How does system perform w/ other VMs running assorted, intensive tasks?
iis sql load test results
IIS/SQL Load Test Results
  • Mercury LoadRunner scripted test
  • Overall performance
    • 100@30/min: VM = 60%
    • 1000@12/min: VM = 99%
  • What made it slow?
    • CPU queuing
    • Memory, HD, NetIO – nearly identical
terminal services citrix load test results
Terminal Services / Citrix Load Test Results

Currently 14 servers, 4procs (8HT), 4GB RAM –load balancing ~700 concurrent

CPU and RAM intensive apps

~60 users max per physical server

CPU = bottleneck (logon & BusObj)

1CPU = 7 users max ; 2 CPU = 12 max

100 v 1CPU or 58 v 2CPU to match 14 physicals

Recommendation: 2 CPU & only for small use

business objects webi dev
Business Objects WebI dev

Win 2000 / IIS5 / 2400MB RAM / 1.4Ghz x 2 (no HT)

Virtualize? Yes. 900 / 1.4Ghz

psoft 8 fin crystal nvision dev
PSoft 8 Fin Crystal/nVision: Dev

Win 2000 / 2300MB RAM / 1.1Ghz x 2 (no HT)

Virtualize? Yes. 900 / 1.4Ghz

psoft8 he crystal nvision prod
PSoft8 HE Crystal/nVision - Prod

Win 2000 / 1500MB RAM / 2.8Ghz x 1 (w/ HT)

Virtualize? NOT at this time – CPU needs too high

sumtotal aspen 2 5 elearning
sumTotal Aspen 2.5 eLearning

Win 2000 / SQL 2000 / 2358MB RAM / 1.9Ghz x 2 (w/ HT)

Virtualize? Yes 2300MB / 1.4Ghz x 2 Note: high NIC=sync ; CPU=imp/exp

domain controllers
Domain Controllers

Win 2003 / 2000MB RAM / 700Mhz x 4 (no HT)

Virtualize? Yes – 850MB / 1.4Ghz

univ of michigan flint
Univ of Michigan - Flint
  • VMWare ESX Server
  • Determining factor: Linux support & MS Virtual Server wasn’t available
  • Several years of experience, starting with GSX, public web services, online teaching, real video server, internal file/print, 46v on 5 physical (15 on 1), <10% slower, Dell 2650’s & 4600’s, 2 proc, 12GB RAM
nc state university
NC State University
  • MS Virtual Server 2005
  • Determining factor: Cost
  • PeopleSoft v8 Crystal/nVision app servers: 18 virtual servers, 7 physical servers, dual Xeon >2GB, physical v. virtual head-to-head, little difference in performance.
potential uses from previous presentations
Potential Uses from Previous Presentations
  • NAP - Remediation Servers – “Big Red Button” for critical fix – assign additional resources
  • Keynote - Reliability – one of pillars of Trustworthy Computing
  • Boston U – Matt - NetReg peak usage first couple weeks of semester
  • WSUS 3Ghz, 1GB RAM recommended – sitting idle most of time?
  • Decrease dev system allocation in busy times
pricing
Pricing

MS Virtual Server 2005 (4CPU Server, 8GB RAM)

  • Win 2003 Std: up to 4 processors, Ent: up to 32
  • VS Std: 4proc/4GB; Ent: 8proc/32GB
  • 2003 Ent/Std: ~$500+~$500 = ~$1000

VMWare Server ESX (4CPU – other pricing scales)

  • ESX: $4500/phy server + $945/yr support
  • ESX+SMP+V-agents: $6000/phy server + $1764/yr support

VMWare Add-ons

  • VirtualCenter server: $3000 + $1050/yr
  • P2V Starter kit (25): $2000 + $420/yr
cost benefit example
Cost / Benefit Example
  • VMWare Server ESX
    • $45K separate HW purchase price
    • $29K + $2K/yr (ESX w/SMP): ~35%
  • MS Virtual Server Std
    • $33K separate HW purchase price
    • $30K virtual HW + software: ~10%

Note: In both cases, estimates are conservative

summary take aways
Summary / take-aways
  • More effective resource utilization and response to changing needs (5-15% to 60-70%)
  • Virtual Server & VMWare = comparable performance, VMWare more isolated
  • VMWare more feature-rich: SMP, VMotion, manage multiple servers
  • VMWare costs more, but you can do more, virtualize more costly servers
  • Both platforms have limits, active improvement
other resources
Other Resources
  • VMWare: www.vmware.com
  • Virtual Server: www.microsoft.com/virtualserver/
  • Rapid App: www.rapidapp.com