Data Center Strategies

It’s painful to watch Sun’s troubles

The senior vice president of Sun’s North America Region Global Sales and Services organization, Randy Seidl moves over to a similar position in today’s announcement from HP.  Good for Randy but its so sad to see Sun get dismantled piece by piece. Not only are Sun's competitors stealing away customers, but they are also taking key executives...especially in sales.  Losing top executives does nothing but erode customer confidence. The Exadata V2 blew some life back into Sun’s corpus morte but Sun's customers need for Oracle to do more - never mind that the TPC counsel slapped oracle down for misleading claims.  How will this end, will there be any customers left by the time the European Union works out their objections to the merger?  I sure would hate to see a company with such a storied past disappear because of a botched merger.

Posted by Gene Ruth

Where’s The Beef?

Yesterday, Oracle announced the first Oracle/Sun post-merger announcement of a an integrated hardware/software product, known as Exadata Version 2 (see here). The previous version of Exadata was built on HP hardware, but it’s no surprise that Oracle has turned to Sun for this, though the timing of the announcement makes it hard to tell whether the decision to use Sun hardware came before or after the merger announcement in April.

On the hardware side it’s not particularly exciting, standard Intel Xeon 55xx-based Sun servers (not SPARC in case you were wondering) combined with Sun’s FlashFire SSD storage subsystem. Interesting, but not earth shattering in it’s ingenuity or innovation. I expect that you’ll see FLASH memory heavily used in future database configurations from many vendors. Dell, HP, and IBM are working with Fusion-IO and Dell has already published record breaking TPC-H benchmark numbers using Fusion-IO technology (see here) so it’s only a matter of time before this becomes common practice.

Unfortunately, the information available from Oracle at this point has no performance data to back this claim, maybe the “teased” October 14th announcement (see here) will fill in the blanks. Personally, I think that people will need to see more innovation from Oracle/Sun if the hardware part of the business is to survive.

Posted by: Nik Simpson

Oracle - “We’re Serious About Hardware”

Based on recent announcements from Oracle, they are at least trying to dispel doubts over their intentions for the Sun hardware business, and poking a finger in IBM’s eye while they are it. This is a welcome sign from Oracle, especially with the additional doubts created by the EU decision to review the merger (see here), a solid statement of intent was increasingly critical to prevent continued hemorrhaging of Sun’s hardware business. The first ad (see below) can be found here,

On the face of it, this is a pretty clear statement of intent and I hope they mean it. But, I’m left wondering how they intend to make good on these promises and still make decent money on SPARC hardware.

The second ad is more direct competitive statement related to IBM’s DB2 business (see here), something that used to be a Sun stronghold.

Today, the king-of-the-hill for a single system database benchmark (TPC/C) is IBM hitting 6,085,166 tpmC, but Oracle seems to be implying that their result will be greater than 10,000,000 tpmC. The question is, will this be an apples to apples comparison of two single boxes or will this be a cluster to single box comparison? My guess is that Sun doesn’t have a single system capable of a result of this magnitude which leaves them with using a clustered version of Oracle for the benchmark.Whatever the case, it should be interesting to see how they do and what hardware they use. Anyway, I’m looking forward to October 14th to see just what they have to say.

Posted by: Nik Simpson

When You Think It’s All Over, It Has Only Begun

Over the last few weeks, you could be forgiven for thinking that the Sun/Oracle merger was a done deal. Recent decisions by Sun’s shareholders to approve the deal, and the US government’s decision not stand in the way seemed to signal the end of the saga. But earlier this week the European Union dropped a bombshell by deciding to investigate the deal, particularly with respect to the acquisition of MySQL. It’s unlikely now that the deal will go through before January 2010 at best, and that’s not good for anyone. There are three possible outcomes, onoe of which is particularly attractive if you are Sun or Oracle (or a Sun customer):

1. The EU eventually approves the deal, meanwhile Sun has been left twisting in the wind for the best part of a year, as it’s competitors steal one customer after another. IN just the past two quarters, Sun’s revenues have dropped 30% and 37% respectively which is little short of disastrous.
2. The EU rejects the merger (and they’ve done that before, just ask GE). A rejection would leave Sun in an untenable position, it’s been hemorrhaging market share over the last few months, and it’s value to possible suitors such as HP would be dramatically reduced by a failed Oracle merger.
3. The EU places conditions on the merger such as preventing Oracle from acquiring key software assets from Sun such as MySQL. Since it was the software that Oracle was after in the first place, this might make the whole deal unattractive to Oracle.

At best, this puts an ever bigger question mark over Sun’s future which can’t be good for their customers. So, whatever the final merits of the deal, I’m inclined to agree with Macbeth, “If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well It were done quickly.”

Posted by: Nik Simpson

Thoughts on the VMworld Day 2 Keynote

I was very impressed by the information disseminated in the second VMworld keynote, led by CTO Steve Herrod. Here’s a summary of the thoughts I tweeted during the morning keynote (in chronological order).

• Steve Herrod talked about a "people centric" approach. VMware's technology needs to understand desktop user behavior. The existing offline VDI model (requiring a manual “check-out”) is not people centric.
• VMware’s announcement to OEM RTO Software’s Virtual Profiles was a good move. Burton Group considers profile virtualization a required element of enterprise desktop virtualization architecture.
• VMware’s Steve Herrod and Mike Coleman discussed VMware’s software-based PC-over-IP (PCoIP) protocol. Feedback from Burton Group clients who were early PCoIP beta testers indicates that the protocol’s development is progressing well.
• Herrod showed a picture of "hosted virtualization" for employee owned PCs on a MacBook. Is that a hint of a forthcoming announcement?
• I would like to know if VMware’s Type I CVP client hypervisor will have VMsafe-like support in the 1.0 release. VMware has made few public statements regarding CVP architecture.
• VMware’s CVP demo looked good, but it didn’t reach the “wow factor” achieved by Citrix when Citrix demoed a type I client hypervisor on a Mac at their Synergy conference.
• The Wyse PocketCloud demonstration was impressive. PocketCloud is VMware’s first answer to the Citrix Receiver for iPhone.
• VMware demonstrated the execution of a Google Android application on a Windows Mobile-based smart phone. Many opportunities exist for VMware and Google to collaborate in the user service and application delivery space.
• Burton Group client experience backs VMware’s claims that vSphere 4.0 is a suitable platform for tier 1 applications. We recommend that x86 virtualization be the default platform for all newly deployed x86 applications, unless an application owner can justify why physical hardware is required (e.g., for a proprietary interface that is unsupported by virtualization).
• To support tier 1 application dynamic load balancing, storage and network I/O must be included in the DRS VM placement calculations. It’s good to see that VMware is heading in that direction. DRS will also need to evaluate non-performance metrics such as vShield Zone membership as part of the VM placement metric (no word on this yet).
• I would like to hear more from folks who have tested AppSpeed. Burton Group clients I have spoken with to date have not been impressed.
• The DMTF needs to start doing more to evangelize the role of OVF as it pertains to cloud computing and service manifests.
• I like vSphere’s VMsafe security API, but I want to see tighter integration with external management (exposed via the SDK), and better integration with VMware’s DRS and DPM services.
• VMware talked about Lab Manager as a tool to promote user self-service for server VMs and applications, but I haven’t heard mention of a similar interface for desktop applications (like Citrix Dazzle). A user application service catalog is a missing part of VMware’s current virtual desktop architecture, and will need to be addressed by either VMware or a third party.
• The data center on the show floor running 37,248 VMs on 776 physical servers would be more impressive if VMware disclosed the applications running on the VMs, along with the application workloads. Otherwise, the demonstration is really just a density science project.
• I liked VMware’s coverage of virtual data centers. They are also defined in Burton Group’s internal cloud hardware infrastructure as a service (HIaaS) reference architecture.
• Herrod mentioned forthcoming network L3 improvements that will make it easier to separate location and identity. This is something to follow.
• Both Cisco and F5 are enablers for VMware’s long distance VMotion and are vendors to follow as this technology further matures.
• VMware’s cloud layered architecture is very similar to the architecture defined in the Drue Reeves’ report “Cloud Computing: Transforming IT.”
• Herrod did a great job articulating the importance of SpringSource to the VMware software solution. VMware needs an application platform to have a chance at holding off Microsoft long term, and SpringSource gives them that.

That’s it for my thoughts on day 2. As always, I’d love to hear your feedback. VMworld 2009 was a great conference. I enjoyed my time meeting with Burton Group clients as well as the several conversations that I had with many attendees. See you next year!

Citrix HDX 3D IHV support

Citrix announced on Monday coming updates to their HDX remote desktop protocol including 3D rendering.  Shortly thereafter, Brian Madded blogged on HDX 3D requirements, specifically that the back-end data center server that hosts the desktop VM requires an NVIDIA GPU that has CUDA capabilities.  Fortunately, modern NVIDIA GPUs have the CUDA feature.  Brian gives a good overview of HDX 3D in his blog is you need the background on what it is.

Dependency on NVIDIA GPU in the server.  This point raised some questions:  Servers don't do graphics, and to save $ - they don't include higher-end GPUs.  Most include just a simple graphics chip on the motherboard.  Since I'm at VMworld and had the opportunity to visit with Independent Hardware Vendors - I went to find out.  Here's the answers I got from HP and Dell:

HP:  HP will support you if you install an NVIDIA GPU adapter (PCIe) into a DL160 or DL165 rackmount 1U server only.  While you can put an NVIDIA GPU in other HP rack mount server products, and it would most likely work, the company won't support you.  That being said, however, HP will direct you to their workstation blade product line - a product specifically built for desktop virtualization purposes.  Each blade in the workstation blade chassis includes an NVIDIA GPU pre-installed on a mezzanine board.  But realize that for graphics intensive solutions, you are stuck to a 1:1 consolidation ratio of desktop to blade without virtualization as the GPU has yet to be virtualized by any hardware (I can suspect we will see this technology in the near future as the demand for desktop virtualization grows).

Dell:  Dell is definitely behind the game here.  Dell currently does not offer any rack or blade servers specifically designed for desktop virtualization - that include a GPU.  The guys in the Dell booth at VMworld did tell me that they have a third party systems integrator that takes Dell blade products, adds the necessary GPU hardware and software and sells those to desktop virtualization customers, but the end product is supported by the partner and not Dell.  The guys in the booth couldn't remember the name of the partner and 15 minutes of Googling didn't turn up any leads either.

Needless to say, the choices are indicative of a market in its infancy with HP in a clear lead.  The next big step will be GPU virtualization.

[Posted by: Richard Jones]

VMworld Day 1 Keynote – A Few Thoughts

VMworld got off to a strong start yesterday, with the Paul Maritz keynote setting an early tone for the day’s events. I used twitter to add commentary to the keynote and plan to do the same today for Steve Herrod’s morning keynote. Below is a summary of my thoughts/tweets on the day 1 keynote.

• VMware’s clear goal is to provide a complete platform for cloud-based computing. I’m hopeful that VMware will spend more time helping customers build internal clouds, which focuses on their immediate needs. Public clouds, while intriguing, is a future initiative for most Burton Group clients.
• Paul Maritz and VMware talk about vSphere as an enabler for choice; however, “choice” is a subjective word. To VMware, choice means choice of cloud providers. To others, choice means choice of virtualization platforms.
• vSphere is a foundation for internal cloud, but to keep it in perspective, it’s just the foundation at this point. VMware and its partners need to build the walls. Improvements such as tighter integration between DRS, DPM, orchestration, and security zoning (i.e., vShield Zones) need to be made. vSphere APIs need to further evolve to communicate logical and physical zoning restrictions from either vShield Zones or VMsafe-enabled appliances to management and automation tools.
• I was glad to see Maritz bring up context switching and its impact on x86 virtualizaiton. Many virtualization consolidation planning tools miss analyzing applications with high context switching and don’t consider it when determining VM placement. This oversight in planning tools can cause post-deployment performance problems.
• Martiz clearly demonstrated his command of the VMware product suite and partner integration avenues. He’s a very technical CEO and his knowledge resonates well with the VMware user base.
• The IBM demonstration of vSphere integration with hardware-assisted virtualization active power management was impressive. Many of our clients are looking at exploiting the Enhanced Intel SpeedStep and Enhanced AMD PowerNow! hardware technologies to save on power and cooling costs.
• Maritz highlighted the importance of chargeback and service catalogs in cloud computing, and I agree. I discussed the importance of both of these technologies in the blog post “Cloud and the Wal-Martification of IT.”
• vCenter Chargeback is a good first step, but I think it falls short of giving IT the complete picture of available capacity. Awareness of factors such as security zoning restrictions is required before vCenter Chargeback will accurately forecast available capacity across an enterprise ESX infrastructure.
• Paul Maritz discussed the concept of a virtual data center. Burton Group agrees with this, as we’ve had virtual data centers in our hardware infrastructure as a service (HIaaS) reference architecture for several months. You can learn more about it here.
• VMware’s running tally of more than 1,000 service provider partners is impressive, but I would like to see increased guidance for customers on how to build out internal clouds.
• VMware submitted the vCloud API to the DMTF – a first step toward making the vCloud API an industry standard. That being said, VMware’s competitors would need to adopt the API for it to be a true standard. A standard with one implementation isn’t a true standard, but rather is a proprietary technology, but with good marketing.
• I liked the vCloud Express demo, but would also like to see a service interface on the front end. I like the option of provisioning a server, but would also like to see a demo of the vCloud Express showing an interface that makes sense for the application developer or business professional.
• Rod Johnson did a tremendous job with the SpringSource demo. Giving application owners an interface to provision an app locally, or to an internal or external cloud was spot-on. IT service delivery requires IT operations to give application owners and individual business units interfaces that they understand. Hyperic is also a key part of an integrated VMware cloud stack and is a technology VMware shops should begin working with in their labs.

That’s it for day 1. I’ll post analysis of the Steve Herrod keynote next.

VMware Submits vCloud API to DMTF

Today, VMware and the Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF) announced that the vCloud API has been submitted to the for work within the DMTF's VMAN initiative toward becoming an industry standard. You can view the spec here.

The idea is to create a standard RESTful API that cloud vendors can use as the interface to their service...ala EC2 API.

My take: This is goodness for the industry and may spark a wave of cloud management application development. However, the measure of a standard is adoption. I mean, if a standard is developed in the forest and no one adopts it, does it make a sound...or is it a standard? History tells us that standards adoption from the DMTF has been mixed (see DASH and SMASH), but on the other hand, vCloud API is closely tied to OVF -- one of the DMTF's more successfully adopted standards, so only time will tell.

It also remains to be seen if vCloud will become the cloud standard or if the EC2 APIs will become the defacto standard. In fact, Eucalyptus has already adopted the EC2 APIs, reinforcing EC2 API's defacto leadership.

The real key is VMware's army of vCloud partners. The more cloud vendors that adopt the API (say Terremark, Verizon, etc) the more pressure they place on non-compliant vendors to adopt the API. In this way, VMware could flip the tables on Amazon, making the EC2 API look proprietary.

In any event, this announcement is leadership by the DMTF and VMware in the cloud space and a key API to watch.

Posted by: Drue Reeves

VMWorld Fun Run: The Aftermath

Well, the first (annual?) VMworld Fun Run is in the books and I have to say...Fantastic! The turnout was phenomenal, the weather was incredible (clear sunny day on the bay), the run was exhilarating. If you didn't run, you missed out.

Thanks to Craig Williams, Duncan Epping, SaveTheBay, the sponsors and the rest of the VMware Army for putting on the event. Thanks also to the Burton Group marketing team (Collin, Kelli, Taylor, Chris) for participating and the shirts (which were at hit). Special thanks to Chris Wolf for setting the pace and the Jon Schulz for getting me through.

VMware, make this an annual event! The PR possibilities are endless...VMworld gives back, Run to Freedom, Hello Runners, etc.

Posted by: Drue Reeves