Registration is open. So be sure to attend and sign in asap! Early birds(till the 11th of July) pay $1,495, after the 11th the price will be $1,745. VMworld officially kicks off on Monday, September 15 with an evening Welcome Reception in the Solutions Exchange. You can attend hands-on labs during the day on Monday, however all other VMworld activities start on Tuesday, September 16.
Can anyone help me out? At several blogs I’ve read that Hyper-V is available with clustering and quick migration for only a fraction of the costs compared to VMware. I was just browsing the internet and stumbled upon the following:
Windows 2008 Enterprise: $3,999 with 25 CALs
The System Center Server Management Suite Enterprise Edition’s price is $1,290.
Comprehensive solution for end-to-end management of physical and virtual server environments that includes the Enterprise Server management licenses for Operations Manager 2007, Configuration Manager 2007, and Data Protection Manager 2007; the license for Virtual Machine Manager 2007; and, rights to manage an unlimited number of operating system environments on a single server.
So Window 2008 Enterprise with Hyper-V $3,999. VMware Enterprise which includes VMotion and HA will cost you $5,750.
System Center Enterprise will cost you $1,290. VMware VirtualCenter will cost you $4,995.
So do you need a System Center Enterprise license for every Hyper-V host you want to manage?
I guess the most important part of Jeff’s post is this:
We’ve drilled into these scenarios further and asked customers, who have currently have Live Migration capabilities, if they have changed their servicing process. In particular, when do they perform their hardware servicing. Is it during business hours 9-5? The overwhelming answer is, “No, we still schedule server downtime and notify folks of the scheduled downtime.”
Even customers with Live Migration still wait until off hours to service the hardware.
I don’t know Jeff’s customers, but it seems like they’re not the most brilliant system engineers in the world. I don’t know a single system engineer who would wait with servicing their hardware if there’s a warning on his system and when he has the opportunity to live migrate. With an 8:1 consolidation rate the importance of fully functional hardware also increased 8 times. What are you going to tell your manager when a hardware device reached it’s threshhold and just stops working? “Sorry, I know we have VMotion but I wanted to service after business hours because I did not want to disturb anyone!”. Well I know what the reaction of your manager will be.
I’ve seen a lot of crooked comparisons, but this is by far the best I’ve seen in years. Especially the part about 5, 10, 20 seconds of downtime. What about your SQL Servers or Exchange. If you could avoid downtime wouldn’t you want to? All these are just excuses Microsoft tries to find for not releasing a full working product with a real live migration functionality. Come one guys, you announced it… did not get the thing working in time, and you are telling the world that nobody needs it. Who are you kidding?
And about patching, the Windows 2008 Core footprint is indeed small compared to the full edition… But it doesn’t even come close to the 32MB ESXi footprint. I’m not even gonna talk about Microsoft patch reputation.
Jeff’s post also pointed me towards another blog where the writer James talks about the same issues. In the comments “vaibhavbagaria” points out a nice pro VMware detail:
The other annoying thing is that MS solution needs two LUNs for each of the servers, one for Quorum and one for Storage. VMware shares a single LUN between upto 16 physical servers. So you could have 14 Active and 2 Standby servers for failover protection.
With Hyper-V, one would need 28 servers and 28 LUNs.
And with ESX 3.5 it’s 32 Servers in a cluster and or 32 Servers attached to a single LUN. So make that 32 Active ESX Servers, no standby because you will have failover possibilities with using your hardware. The MS score would be 32 active and 32 standby with 32 LUNs. Well that would give you a nice consolidation rate I guess and really reduce the energy costs. Talking green…
James O’Neill just replied to my post with the following:
You could also have 8 all active nodes and achieve the same thing. I think we only go to 8 so you would have to have each one running at 7/8th capacity. VMWare could run at 31/32, against our 28/32
It seems like blogging is also a trend over at Ictivity. Another colleague of mine just recently started blogging. His blog is not fully functional(RSS) but there are a couple of interesting reads over there. Rene Jorissen is one of the upcoming “Connectivity” Consultant who mainly focuses on Cisco.
Check out his blog.
A couple of short outtakes:
Source: Our VMware consultants always choose Route based on IP hashes as load-balancing algorithm. This means that load-balancing happens on layer 3 of the OSI model (source-destination-IP)
Source: CactiEZ is a software appliance, which is up and running in half an hour. After that you just add some devices and you can generate some nice bandwidth statistics with the help of RRDTool.
Source: QoS is an important tool to assign VoIP traffic more preference over “normal” traffic. Important for QoS tools to function correctly is placing different kinds of traffic in different queues. To place traffic in different queues, traffic should be classified.
Recently there was an article published on the Microsoft Virtualization Blog which compared Hyper-V’s High Availability/Quick Migration capabilities to VMware’s VMotion. (VMblog pointed me towards the article) In the second article the writer responds on a large amount of reactions he had regarding VMotion being superior:
After my last blog I received almost two dozen email telling me that VMotion was far superior for unplanned host downtime and that it was a much better HA solution because it could live migrate virtual machines. I’ve heard this fallacy espoused for many years and, folks, this simply isn’t the case.
In the case of unplanned downtime, VMotion can’t live migrate because there is no warning. Instead you must have VMware HA configured and the best it can do is restart the affected virtual machines on other nodes which is the same as what is provided with Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V and Failover Clustering.
I can imagine why people reacted, in the first post the writer only mentioned VMotion. For unplanned downtime VMware doesn’t use VMotion because when it’s unplanned the VM’s get cutoff and will be restarted on another host with the use of HA(VMware High Availability). There’s no need for a migration when a VM is powered off.
Indeed Microsoft can do the same with the use of Clustering. But can you live migrate virtual machines when a server needs maintenance? No, at this moment that’s not possible. In other words, you will have to wait for a suitable moment… planned downtime, probably after business hours. But in a 24×7 environment will there ever be a suitable moment? Even when your business isn’t 24×7, if there’s a possible hardware failure would you want to wait? But when you have a 8:1 consolidation ratio you probably will not be the most popular system engineer when “quick migrating” the file server or the mail server especially when these VM’s have a lot of RAM assigned.
Besides that, with the upcoming new product, Continuous Availability, even unplanned downtime will not crash your VM. CA will constantly mirror your VM to another host, like a continous VMotion I guess, and when the active host fails the standby host will become active. In other words, no unplanned downtime anymore.