Server virtualization technologies uses comparisons and implications
Download
1 / 46

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 261 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 [email protected] 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 '' - 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 l.jpg

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

[email protected]


Presentation overview l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg

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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
VMotion

  • Enables seamless transition of live virtual host between physical servers

  • Dynamic Resource Allocation across servers – respond to load changes

  • HW maintenance


Best practices l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
IIS/SQL Load Test Results

  • Mercury LoadRunner scripted test

  • Overall performance

  • What made it slow?

    • CPU queuing

    • Memory, HD, NetIO – nearly identical


Terminal services citrix load test results l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
Domain Controllers

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

Virtualize? Yes – 850MB / 1.4Ghz


Univ of michigan flint l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
Other Resources

  • VMWare: www.vmware.com

  • Virtual Server: www.microsoft.com/virtualserver/

  • Rapid App: www.rapidapp.com


David sweetman university of michigan dsweetma@umich edu l.jpg
David SweetmanUniversity of [email protected]

Questions?


ad