Posts Tagged ‘Virtualization’

« Older Entries

Gestalt IT Tech Field Day – Compellent

July 16th, 2010

Gestalt IT Tech Field Day 2 begins with Compellent, a storage vendor out of Eden Prairie, MN.  Compellent has been around for about eight years and, like other well known multiprotocol SAN vendors, offers spindles of FC, SATA, SAS, and SSD via FC block, iSCSI, NFS, and CIFS.

Compellent’s hardware approach is a modular one.  Many of the components, such as drives and interfaces (Ethernet, FC, etc.), are easily replacable and hot swappable, eliminating the need to “rip and replace” the entire frame of hardware and providing the ability to upgrade components without taking down the array.

In April of 2010, Compellent introduced the new zNAS solution:

Compellent introduces the new zNAS solution, which consolidates file and block storage on a single, intelligent platform. The latest unified storage offering from Compellent integrates next-generation ZFS software, high-performance hardware and Fluid Data architecture to actively manage and move data in a virtual pool of storage, regardless of the size and type of block, file or drive. Enterprises can simplify management, intelligently scale capacity, improve performance for critical applications and reduce complexity and costs.

Fluid Data Storage is Compellent’s granular approach to data management

  • Virtualization
  • Intelligence
  • Automation
  • Utilization

Volume Creation

Volume Recovery

Volume Management

Integration 

  • VMware
    • Leveraging many of the features mentioned above
    • HCL compatibility although I don’t see ESXi in the list which would be a major concern for VMware customers given that ESX is being phased out.  Compellent responded they believe their arrays are compatible with ESXi and will look into updating their VMware support page if that is the case.  VMware’s HCL also shows Compellent storage is not currently certified for ESXi. Significant correction to the earlier statement: VMware’s HCL for storage is inconsistently different than it’s HCL for host hardware in that the host hardware HCL lists explicit compatiblity for both ESX and ESXi, whereas the storage HCL explicitly lists ESX compatibility which implies equivilent ESXi compatibility. Compellent arrays, as of this writing, are both ESX4 and ESXi4 compatible.
  • Microsoft
    • PowerShell (for automation and consistency of storage management)
    • Hyper-V

Compellent performed a live demo of their Replay (Snapshot) feature with a LUN presented to a Windows host.  It worked slick and as expected. Compellent’s Windows based storage management UI has a fresh, no-nonsense, 21st century feel to it which I can appreciate.

We closed discussion answering the question “Why Compellent?”  Top Reasons:

  1. Efficiency
  2. Long term ROI, cost savings through the upgrade model
  3. Ease of use

Follow them on Twitter at @Compellent.

Thank you Compellent for the presentation and I’m sure I’ll see you back in Minnesota!

Note : Tech Field Day is a sponsored event. Although I receive no direct compensation and take personal leave to attend, all event expenses are paid by the sponsors through Gestalt IT Media LLC. No editorial control is exerted over me and I write what I want, if I want, when I want, and how I want.

4 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Gestalt IT Tech Field Day Seattle

July 15th, 2010

Gestalt IT was gracious enough to invite me back as a delegate for Tech Field Day Seattle which is happening… well… now, not to put too fine a point on it.  I’m really excited about this opportunity!  For the next two days, I’ll be at the Microsoft campus in Redmond, WA taking in vendor presentations and participating in peer discussions spanning a few different technology verticals. 

We kicked things off tonight with dinner, discussion, and door prizes at Cedarbrook Lodge in Seatac, WA.  There are a lot of new faces in this group of delegates.  I don’t know most of the guys but that makes for a great opportunity to meet new people and network.  In a word, Cedarbrook is gorgeous.  It has more of a resort feel to it than a hotel.  It’s too bad I won’t be spending more time here but the show must go on.

Tomorrow (Thursday), the other delegates and I will be meeting with Veeam, F5, and a stealth company which officially launches in our very presence tomorrow.  I’m familiar with most of Veeam’s offerings but as a virtualization guy, I’m hoping to see more about their SureBackup technology.  I’ve known of F5 for many years but just recently I’m seeing them push their way into the virtualization arena.  Just last week they have expressed interest in participating in the Minneapolis VMUG.  I’m anxious in seeing what value they bring to the virtualized datacenter.  We cap off the day with a party at the Museum of Flight which should be really cool.

Moving into Friday, we’ll hear from Compellent on what they have been up to in the storage arena and how they are doing things differently than other storage vendors such as EMC, NetApp, Hitachi, HP, IBM, 3PAR, Dell, FalconStor, Pillar, etc.  We’ll also be spending some time with NEC.  I’m real curious as to what they are going to present.  Talk about a diverse portfolio of products (as well as professional services).  Whatever it is, I’ll be looking for virtualization relevance.  Not only that, but will we see a landscape that continues to cater to cloud agility?  Cloud has picked up a lot of momentum.  It’s real.  Adopt, adapt, integrate, or get run over by it.  There may be one more vendor on Friday… that remains to be seen at this point.  We end Friday with dinner in the evening and then some of us will start our journey back home.

I’m looking forward to a couple of great days.

Note : Tech Field Day is a sponsored event. Although I receive no direct compensation and take personal leave to attend, all event expenses are paid by the sponsors through Gestalt IT Media LLC. No editorial control is exerted over me and I write what I want, if I want, when I want, and how I want.

4 comments »

Posted in General, Virtualization

Tags:

OVF? OVA? WTF?

July 2nd, 2010

If you’ve worked with recent versions of VMware virtual infrastructure, Converter, or Workstation, you may be familiar with the fact that these products have the native ability to work with virtual machines in the Open Virtualization Format, or OVF for short.  OVF is a Specification governed by the DMTF (Distributed Management Task Force) which to me sounds a lot like RFCs which provide standards for protocols and communication across compute platforms – basically SOPs for how content is delivered on the internet as we know it today.

So if there’s one standard, why is it that when I choose to create an OVF (Export OVF Template in the vSphere Client), I’m prompted to create either an OVF or an OVA?  If the OVF is an OVF, then what’s an OVA?

 7-2-2010 8-00-01 PM

Personally, I’ve seen both formats, typically when deploying packaged appliances.  The answer is simple: Both the OVF and the OVA formats roll up into the Specification defined by the DMTF.  The difference between the two is in the presentation and encapsulation.  The OVF is a construct of a few files, all of which are essential to its definition and deployment.  The OVA on the other hand is a single file with all of the necessary information encapsulated inside of it.  Think of the OVA as an archive file.  The single file format provides ease in portability.  From a size or bandwidth perspective, there is no advantage between one format or the other as they each tend to be the same size when all is said and done.

7-2-2010 8-13-26 PM

The DMTF explains the two formats on pages 12 through 13 in the PDF linked above:

An OVF package may be stored as a single file using the TAR format. The extension of that file shall be .ova (open virtual appliance or application).

An OVF package can be made available as a set of files, for example on a standard Web server.

Do keep in mind that which ever file type you choose to work with, if you plan on hosting them on a web server, MIME types will need to be set up for .OVF, OVA, or both, in order for a client to download them for deployment onto your hypervisor.

At 41 pages, the OVF Specification contains a surprising amount of detail.  There’s more to it than you might think, and for good reason:

The Open Virtualization Format (OVF) Specification describes an open, secure, portable, efficient and extensible format for the packaging and distribution of software to be run in virtual machines.

Open, meaning cross platform (bring your own hypervisor).  Combined with Secure and Portable attributes, OVF may be one of the key technologies for intracloud and intercloud mobility.  The format is a collaborative effort spawned from a variety of contributors:

Simon Crosby, XenSource
Ron Doyle, IBM
Mike Gering, IBM
Michael Gionfriddo, Sun Microsystems
Steffen Grarup, VMware (Co-Editor)
Steve Hand, Symantec
Mark Hapner, Sun Microsystems
Daniel Hiltgen, VMware
Michael Johanssen, IBM
Lawrence J. Lamers, VMware (Chair)
John Leung, Intel Corporation
Fumio Machida, NEC Corporation
Andreas Maier, IBM
Ewan Mellor, XenSource
John Parchem, Microsoft
Shishir Pardikar, XenSource
Stephen J. Schmidt, IBM
René W. Schmidt, VMware (Co-Editor)
Andrew Warfield, XenSource
Mark D. Weitzel, IBM
John Wilson, Dell

Take a look at the OVF Specifications document as well as some of the other work going on at DTMF. 

Have a great and safe July 4th weeekend, and congratulations to the Dutch on their win today in World Cup Soccer.  I for one will be glad when it’s all over with and our Twitter APIs can return to normal again.

7 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

P2V Milestone

May 15th, 2010

If you’re reading this, that’s good news because it means last night’s P2V completed successfully.  I took the last remaining non-virtualized physical infrastructure server in the lab and made it a virtual machine.  Resource and role wise, this was the largest physical lab server next to the ESX hosts themselves.

Resources:

  • HP Proliant DL380 G3
  • Dual Intel P4 2.8GHz processors
  • 6GB RAM
  • 1/2 TB  local storage
  • Dual Gb NICs
  • Dual fibre channel HBAs

Roles:

  • Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition SP2
  • File server
    • binaries
    • isos
    • my documents
    • thousands of family pictures
    • videos
  • Print server
  • IIS web server
    • WordPress blog
    • ASP.NET based family web site
    • other hosted sites
  • DHCP server
  • SQL 2005 server
    • vCenter
    • VUM
    • Citrix Presentation Server
  • MySQL server
    • WordPress blog
  • Backup Sever
  • SAN management

I’m shutting down this last remaining physical server as well as the tape library.  They’ll go in the pile of other physical assets which are already for sale or they will be donated as sales for 32-bit server hardware are slow right now.  This is a milestone because this server, named SKYWALKER – you may have heard me mention it from time to time, has been a physical staple in the lab for as long as the lab has existed (circa 1995).  Granted it has gone through several physical hardware platform migrations, its logical role is historic and its composition has always been physical.  To put it into perspective, at one point in time SKYWALKER was a Compaq Prosignia 300 server with a Pentium Pro processor and a single internal Barracuda 4.3GB SCSI drive.  Before my abilities to acquire server class hardware, it was hand-me-down whitebox parts from earlier gaming rigs.

The P2V (using VMware Converter) took a little over 5 hours for 500GB of storage.  So the only physical servers remaining in the lab are the ESX hosts themselves.  2 DL385 G2s and 2 DL385s which typically remain powered down, earmarked for special projects.  A successful P2V is a great start to a weekend if you ask me.  Now I’m off to my daughter’s T-ball game. :)

No comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Configuring disks to use VMware Paravirtual SCSI (PVSCSI) adapters

March 25th, 2010

This is one of those “I’m documenting it for my own purposes” articles.  Yes I read my own blog once in a while to find information on past topics.  Here I’m basically copying a VMware KB article but I’ll provide a brief introduction.

So your wondering if you should use VMware Paravirtual SCSI?  I’ve gotten this question a few times.  PVSCSI is one of those technologies where “should I implement it” could be best answered with the infamous consulting reply “it depends”.  One person asked if it would be good to use as a default configuration for all VMs.  One notion that I would agree on by and large is that I feel the support complexity increases when using PVSCSI and it should only be used as needed for VMs which need an additional bit of performance squeezed from the disk subsystem.  This is not a technology I would implement by default on all VMs.  Dissecting the practical beneifts and ROI of implementing PVSCSI should be performed, but before that, your valuable time may be better spent finding out if your environment will support it to begin with.  Have a look at VMware KB Article 1010398 which is where the following information comes from, verbatim.

It’s important to identify the guest VMs which support PVSCSI:

Paravirtual SCSI adapters are supported on the following guest operating systems:

  • Windows Server 2008
  • Windows Server 2003
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 5

It’s important to further identify more ambiguous type situations where PVSCSI may or may not not fit:

Paravirtual SCSI adapters also have the following limitations:

  • Hot add or hot remove requires a bus rescan from within the guest.
  • Disks with snapshots might not experience performance gains when used on Paravirtual SCSI adapters or if memory on the ESX host is overcommitted.
  • If you upgrade from RHEL 5 to an unsupported kernel, you might not be able to access data on the virtual machine’s PVSCSI disks. You can runvmware-config-tools.pl with the kernel-version parameter to regain access.
  • Because the default type of newly hot-added SCSI adapter depends on the type of primary (boot) SCSI controller, hot-adding a PVSCSI adapter is not supported.
  • Booting a Linux guest from a disk attached to a PVSCSI adapter is not supported. A disk attached using PVSCSI can be used as a data drive, not a system or boot drive. Booting a Microsoft Windows guest from a disk attached to a PVSCSI adapter is not supported in versions of ESX prior to ESX 4.0 Update 1. 

For more information on PVSCSI, including installation steps, see VMware KB Article 1010398.  One more important thing to note is that in some operating system types, to install PVSCSI, you need to create a virtual machine with the LSI controller, install VMware Tools, then change to the drives to paravirtualized mode.

1 comment »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

VMware VI3 Implementation and Administration

January 11th, 2010

I recently finished reading the book VMware VI3 Implementation and Administration by Eric Siebert (ISBN-13: 978-0-13-700703-5).  VMware VI3 Implementation and Administration was a very enjoyable read. I don’t mean to sound cliché but for me it was one of those books that is hard to put down. Released in May of 2009, along with the next generation of VMware IV (vSphere), the timing of its arrival to market probably could have been better, but better late than never. Datacenters will be running on VI3 for quite some time. With that in mind, this book provides a tremendous amount of value and insight. I can tell that Eric put a lot of time and research into this book; the quality of the content shows. Much of the book was review for me, but I was still able to pick up bits and pieces here and there I wasn’t aware of, as well as some fresh perspective and new approaches to design, administration, and support.

To be honest and objective, I felt that Chapter 9, “Backing Up Your Virtual Environment”, lacked the completeness which all other chapters were given. A single page was dedicated to VMware Consolidated Backup with no detailed examples or demonstrations of how to use it, which would have been found throughout other chapters. To add, there was only a few sentences covering Replication which is a required component in many environments. Eric likes to discuss 3rd party solutions and this would have been a great opportunity to go into more detail or at least mention some products affordable to businesses of any size which could leverage replication solutions.

Overall, this is a great book. Eric has a no-nonsense writing style backed by decades of in the trench experience. Along with the print copy, you get a free electronic online edition as well allowing you to access the book anywhere where there is internet connectivity.  Pick up your copy today!  I thank you Eric and look forward to your upcoming vSphere book!

No comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Virtualizing the grid

July 8th, 2009

I picked up this interesting map off Christopher Crowhurst’s blog. It’s a visualization of the United States power grid. The source comes from NPR’s article “Visualizing The Grid“. Follow the link to NPR and click on the various tabs at the top to see power plant, solar power, and wind power sources across the United States.

How much power are you saving due to virtualization?  Don’t forget virtualization cuts power consumption in more ways than just one.  The most obvious would be the reduction in server hardware count in the datacenter.  There are other indirect power savings vectors such as reduction in cooling, reduction in network and SAN switches due to server consolidation, less UPS utilization, and maybe even a reduction in datacenter size which in and of itself presents more indirect savings:  security, plumbing, utility lighting, cleaning, maintenance, real estate, etc.

7-8-2009 9-46-46 AM

No comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

In search of an application migration solution

June 22nd, 2009

I’m reaching out to software vendors and/or readers who might be aware of an end to end application migration solution or an application migration story outlining solutions, challenges, successes, etc. The solution should be software driven. The solution will seamlessly migrate applications, services, and daemons from one platform (Windows or Linux) to another platform in the same family. As an example, the solution would migrate applications and/or services from Windows 2000 Server to Windows Server 2003. On the Linux side, another example would be migrating applications and/or daemons from SLES 9.x to SLES 10.x.

As I stated, the solution would need to be as seamless and end to end as possible. Application and platform dependencies would need to be taken into consideration, and addressed or mitigated. For example, service packs, .DLLs, .NET framework, PERL, etc. on the Windows side. Kernel versioning, compiling, PERL, etc. on the Linux side.

I’m not exactly looking for professional services, however, I would be interested in hearing about your process and the tools you use. The solution need not be virtualization specific. The right tool would work with IBM, HP, Dell, whitebox, or virtual hardware.

If you are a vendor with a solution, or a reader with some application migration background, please drop me a line at jason@boche.net or feel free to reply to this blog entry with a comment. Feedback both small or large is welcomed as usual.

Thank you in advance.

2 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

ThinLaunch Software Announces the Immediate Availability of Thin Desktop 2.3.2

June 13th, 2009

6-13-2009 7-33-25 PM

(St. Paul, MN) ThinLaunch Software, LLC (www.thinlaunch.com) announces the immediate availability of Thin Desktop 2.3.2, Thin Desktop 2.3.2 enhances the award winning Thin Desktop application announced in August, 2008. Thin Desktop 2.3.2 simplifies deployment and adoption of Virtual Desktop Strategies by overcoming common barriers associated with the implementation of these strategies.

Thin Desktop enhances the overall value of virtualization by simplifying the deployment and implementation of virtual desktops at the user device. Thin Desktop replaces the local user interface, then locks down and monitors the user / client device. This allows the administrator to gain complete control over the client end point and the user experience. When compared to group policy methods, “registry hacks” and other similar approaches, Thin Desktop is far easier to implement, deploy and maintain. Unlike the implementation of a traditional Thin Client model, Thin Desktop requires no changes to the enterprise infrastructure and has no server footprint or management server.

When a PC or Thin Client is locked down using Thin Desktop, the typical shell / user interface is hidden from the user and replaced by the designated connection or application. At the same time, underlying capabilities allowed by the administrator can remain intact. No changes to the enterprise infrastructure are required and no additional tools or management functionality is needed.

The release of version 2.3.2 enhances deployment of Thin Desktop using industry standard methods, tools and architectures. An administrator can now deploy and implement Thin Desktop on any PC or Thin Client via standard unattended silent install capability and existing software distribution and imaging methods.

“Thin Desktop 2.3.2 is the result of feedback form a wide variety of customers with very diverse use cases and requirements. A common thread is the desire to adopt virtual desktop technologies while preserving investments in current hardware, infrastructure and skill sets – with a clear path for future hardware and virtualization options.”, said ThinLaunch Software General Manager, Mike Cardinal. “Customer environments with both PC and Thin Client devices will coexist for the foreseeable future. Most users don’t care about the box connected to the monitor, keyboard and mouse – and administrators don’t want them to care.”

For additional information and an Evaluation Download of Thin Desktop, visit the website at www.thinlaunch.com

About ThinLaunch Software, LLC
ThinLaunch Software, LLC has developed Thin Desktop to enhance the value of client device assets. Established in May of 2007, ThinLaunch software is privately held and based in Eagan, MN, a suburb of St. Paul, MN.
ThinLaunch Software and Thin Desktop are registered trademark of ThinLaunch Software, LLC. Additional trademarks and Patents Pending. Please visit the website at: www.thinlaunch.com

No comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Cloud Camp Minneapolis

April 18th, 2009

IMG00028-20090418-1006Today I attended Cloud Camp Minneapolis from 9:00am to 3:30pm on the University of Minnesota East Bank campus. I think the event was large success. Registration was SOLD OUT and it looked like there was somewhere between 100 and 150 attendees. I think it speaks well for the technology and the event organization when that many people will give up the majority of an absolutely gorgeous Saturday.

The event started with a continental like breakfast where people mingled and socialized for an hour before the speaking agenda began. I ran into a few familiar faces and also met with new people I hadn’t met before. The coffee was strong and the bagels looked good.

After breakfast, we were ushered into the main auditorium. George Reese (pictured top left), cloud book author and event organizer from enStratus Networks, kicked things off by briefly introducing himself as well as the premier sponsors: VISI, enStratus, Microsoft, Hosso The Rackspace Cloud, Aserver, and Right Scale.

Shortly after, the Lightning Talks began. This is where the premier event sponsors were allowed just a few minutes to deliver their cloud speech along with a little product marketing while literally whipping through their slide deck. When I say just a few minutes, I literally mean it. I think five vendors all got up and delivered their presentations in a total of 15 minutes. If you’ve ever watched the television program “Mad Money”, it was like cloud talk and offerings during the lightning round. It was both an interesting and refreshing approach.

Next we had a lengthy group discussion on hot cloud topics which were in turn used to dynamically develop the afternoon breakout session topics. We touched on things such as security, mobility, legal and liability implications, small business, etc.

We broke for lunch where I had discussions with a few locals on phone, cable, and internet service providers (ISPs) in the state of Minnesota.

After lunch the large group broke up into the smaller breakout sessions mentioned previously. I attended two sessions: Mobility and SMB.

The mobility session had a good crowd mixture comprised of service providers, application developers, and CEOs. The discussions jumped from topic to topic as people offered up their problems, questions, and philosophies orbiting cloud mobility and isolation. Not to my surprise, there was very little along the lines of answers or solutions. That’s ok. I wasn’t expecting any. Frankly, I found comfort among large numbers of industry experts who, like I, didn’t have the answers and were just as perplexed about figuring out how this is all going to work out. Developers seemed to be the most concerned about the application layer (Applications as a Service) as discussions touched on APIs and applications in the cloud and their impact on development techniques as it applies to mobility. I got a sense of less concern over platform in the cloud, also known as Platform as a Service. One developer talked about his current experience of using Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2). His direct benefits: he owns and supports nothing, and he pays only for what he uses. When he’s not using it, there’s essentially little or no cost. When he’s done, I imagine he saves what he needs, and the rest is destroyed. There is no traditional decommissioning and writing off of assets. There is no hardware that needs to be disposed of properly.

The SMB session was another good mixture of attendees nearly the same as above but with more of a concentration on small business, as well as micro and nano business (phrases coined during the session representing entities smaller than small business). The general idea of this session was if and how small businesses can benefit from cloud offerings. Talks began with the various ways to define a small business: by revenue? by headcount? by technology? There are examples of large manufacturing plants that have small technology footprints. Likewise, small operations can generate large amounts of revenue with the assistance of technology. Group members proposed that there exists many inefficiencies in small business, particularly in the technology and infrastructure. This is where renting platforms, applications, services, and infrastructure from cloud providers could make sense for SMBs. Wouldn’t small businesses rather focus their time and energy on developing their products and services instead of being tied down by the technology they need to run their business on? From a customer or partner credibility standpoint, does a business look more professional and equipped running their business in a certified cloud datacenter, or a broom closet? What impacts will regulation and legislation have? Decisions of how to securely store and deliver customer information in a small business shouldn’t be taken lightly. There are consequences that could easily break the trust and financial backing that a small business or startup’s survivability relies on.

In all, I had a great time at Cloud Camp Minneapolis. If you asked me six months ago what I know about the cloud, I would have had nothing to say other than “I don’t get it”. I’ve gradually been warming up to the concept and today Cloud Camp Minneapolis went a long way in delivering my first feeling of personal and professional accomplishment in that I think I’m actually caught up and on the same page as many of my peers and higher experts in the cloud community. However, I have to be honest in saying that I walked away somewhat disappointed and in disbelief that virtualization discussion was nearly non-existent. The last two VMworld virtualization conferences I attended in Las Vegas and Cannes were strongly focused on cloud computing and VMware’s Virtual Datacenter OS (VDC-OS). There was maybe one mention of VMware in one sentence and a brief reference to VDI. Microsoft was on site talking about Azure and there was no mention of Hyper-V. No mention of XenServer, Virtual Iron, etc. I’ve been led to understand that virtualization is key component to cloud infrastructure, applications, and mobility. I anticipated much of today’s discussions would revolve around virtuailzation. I couldn’t have been more wrong. After the event finished, I sent out a tweet re: no virtualization talk today. I received a response stating virtualization is merely a widget or one small component among many in the cloud. Virtualization is not really as integral as I’m being told by Paul Maritz of VMware. Maybe this is a case of Jason has been drinking too much VMware Kool-Aid for too long. The answers about the cloud are coming. Slowly but surely. Hopefully Paul is right and VMware does have a significant role to play in their version of global cloud computing. I’d like to see it, realize it, and experience it.

5 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

New ESX(i) 3.5 security patch released; scenarios and installation notes

April 11th, 2009

On Friday April 10th, VMware released two patches:

Both address the same issue:

A critical vulnerability in the virtual machine display function might allow a guest operating system to run code on the host. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures Project (cve.mitre.org) has assigned the name CVE-2009-1244 to this issue.

Hackers must love vulnerabilities like this because they can get a lot of mileage out of essentially a single attack. The ability to execute code on an ESX host can impact all running VMs on that host.

Although proper virtualization promises isolation, the reality is that no hardware or software vendor is perfect and from time to time we’re going to see issues like this. Products are under constant attack from hackers (both good and bad) to find exploits. In virtualized environments, it’s important to remember that guest VMs and guest operating systems are no different than their physical counterparts in that they need to be properly protected from the network. That means adequate virus protection, spyware protection, firewalls, encryption, packet filtering, etc.

This vulnerability in VMware ESX and ESXi is really a two factor attack. In order to compromise the ESX or ESXi host, the guest VM must first be vulnerable to compromise on the network to provide the entry point to the host. Once the guest VM is compromised, the next step is to get from the guest VM to the ESX(i) host. Hosts without the patch will be vulnerable to the next attack which we know from reading above will allow who knows what code to be executed on the host. If the host is patched, we maintain our guest isolation and the attack stops at the VM level. Unfortunately, the OS running in the guest VM is still compromised, again highlighting the need for adequate protection of the operating system and applications running in each VM.

The bottom line is this is an important update for your infrastructure. If your ESX or ESXi hosts are vulnerable, you’ll want to get this one tested and implemented as soon as possible.

I installed the updates today in the lab and discovered something interesting that is actually outlined in both of the KB articles above:

  • The ESXi version of the update requires a reboot. Using Update Manager, the patch process goes like this: Remediate -> Maintenance Mode -> VMotion VMs off -> Patch -> Reboot -> Exit Maintenance Mode. The duration of installation of the patch until exiting maintenance mode (including the reboot in between) took 12 minutes.
  • The ESX version of the update does not require a reboot. Using Update Manager, the patch process goes like this: Remediate -> Maintenance Mode -> VMotion VMs off -> Patch -> Exit Maintenance Mode. The duration of installation of the patch until exiting maintenance mode (with no reboot in between) took 1.5 minutes.

Given reboot times of the host, patching ESX hosts goes much quicker than patching ESXi hosts. Reboot times on HP Proliant servers aren’t too bad but I’ve been working with some powerful IBM servers lately and the reboot times on those are significantly longer than HP. Hopefully we’re not rebooting ESX hosts on a regular basis so with that in mind, reboot times aren’t a huge concern, but if you’ve got a large environment with a lot of hosts requiring reboots, the reboot times are going to be cumulative in most cases. Consider my environment above. A 6 node ESXi cluster is going to take 72 minutes to patch, not including VMotions. A 6 node ESX cluster is going to take 9 minutes to patch, not including VMotions. This may be something to really think about when weighing the decision of ESX versus ESXi for your environment.

Update: One more item critical to note is that although the ESX version of the patch requires no reboot, the patch does require three other patches to be installed, at least one of which requires a reboot.  If you already meet the requirements, no reboot will be required for ESX to install the new patch.

In closing, while we are on the subject of performing a lot of VMotions, take a look at a guest blog post from Simon Long called VMotion Performance. Simon shows us how to modify VirtualCenter (vCenter Server) to allow more simultaneous VMotions which will significantly cut down the amount of time spent patching ESX hosts in a cluster.

1 comment »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Setup for Microsoft cluster service

April 1st, 2009

Setting up a Microsoft cluster on VMware used to be a fairly straight forward task with a very minimal set of considerations. Over time, the support documentation has evolved into something that looks like it was written by the U.S Internal Revenue Service. I was an Accountant in my previous life and I remember Alternative Minimum Tax code that was easier to follow than what we have today, a 50 page .PDF representing VMware’s requirements for MSCS support. Even with that, I’m not sure Microsoft supports MSCS on VMware. The Microsoft SVVP program supports explicit versions and configurations of Windows 2000/2003/2008 on ESX 3.5 update 2 and 3, and ESXi 3.5 update 3 but no mention is made regarding clustering. I could not find a definitive answer on the Microsoft SVVP program site other than the following disclaimer:

For more information about Microsoft’s policies for supporting software running in non-Microsoft hardware virtualization software please refer to http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=897615. In addition, refer to http://support.microsoft.com/kb/957006/ to find more information about Microsoft’s support policies for its applications running in virtual environments.

At any rate, here are some highlights of MSCS setup on VMware Virtual Infrastructure, and by the way, all of this information is fair game for the VMware VCP exam.

Prerequisites for Cluster in a Box

To set up a cluster in a box, you must have:

* ESX Server host, one of the following:

* ESX Server 3 - An ESX Server host with a physical network adapter for the

service console. If the clustered virtual machines need to connect with external

hosts, then an additional network adapter is highly recommended.

* ESX Server 3i - An ESX Server host with a physical network adapter for the

VMkernel. If the clustered virtual machines need to connect with external

hosts, a separate network adapter is recommended.

* A local SCSI controller. If you plan to use a VMFS volume that exists on a SAN, you

need an FC HBA (QLogic or Emulex).

You can set up shared storage for a cluster in a box either by using a virtual disk or by

using a remote raw device mapping (RDM) LUN in virtual compatibility mode

(non‐pass‐through RDM).

When you set up the virtual machine, you need to configure:

* Two virtual network adapters.

* A hard disk that is shared between the two virtual machines (quorum disk).

* Optionally, additional hard disks for data that are shared between the two virtual

machines if your setup requires it. When you create hard disks, as described in this

document, the system creates the associated virtual SCSI controllers.

Prerequisites for Clustering Across Boxes

The prerequisites for clustering across boxes are similar to those for cluster in a box.

You must have:

* ESX Server host. VMware recommends three network adapters per host for public

network connections. The minimum configuration is:

* ESX Server 3 - An ESX Server host configured with at least two physical

network adapters dedicated to the cluster, one for the public and one for the

private network, and one network adapter dedicated to the service console.

* ESX Server 3i - An ESX Server host configured with at least two physical

network adapters dedicated to the cluster, one for the public and one for the

private network, and one network adapter dedicated to the VMkernel.

* Shared storage must be on an FC SAN.

* You must use an RDM in physical or virtual compatibility mode (pass‐through

RDM or non‐pass‐through RDM). You cannot use virtual disks for shared storage.

Prerequisites for Standby Host Clustering

The prerequisites for standby host clustering are similar to those for clustering across

boxes. You must have:

* ESX Server host. VMware recommends three network adapters per host for public

network connections. The minimum configuration is:

* ESX Server 3 - An ESX Server host configured with at least two physical

network adapters dedicated to the cluster, one for the public and one for the

private network, and one network adapter dedicated to the service console.

* ESX Server 3i - An ESX Server host configured with at least two physical

network adapters dedicated to the cluster, one for the public and one for the

private network, and one network adapter dedicated to the VMkernel.

* You must use RDMs in physical compatibility mode (pass‐through RDM).

You cannot use virtual disk or RDM in virtual compatibility mode

(non‐pass‐through RDM) for shared storage.

* You cannot have multiple paths from the ESX Server host to the storage.

* Running third‐party multipathing software is not supported. Because of this

limitation, VMware strongly recommends that there only be a single physical path

from the native Windows host to the storage array in a configuration of

standby‐host clustering with a native Windows host. The ESX Server host

automatically uses native ESX Server multipathing, which can result in multiple

paths to shared storage.

* Use the STORport Miniport driver for the FC HBA (QLogic or Emulex) in the

physical Windows machine.

Cluster in a Box Cluster Across Boxes Standby Host Clustering
Virtual disks Yes No No
Pass-through RDM (physical compatibility mode) No Yes Yes
Non-pass-through RDM (virtual compatibility mode) Yes Yes No

Caveats, Restrictions, and Recommendations

This section summarizes caveats, restrictions, and recommendation for using MSCS in

a VMware Infrastructure environment.

* VMware only supports third‐party cluster software that is specifically listed as

supported in the hardware compatibility guides. For latest updates to VMware

support for Microsoft operating system versions for MSCS, or for any other

hardware‐specific support information, see the Storage/SAN Compatibility Guide for

ESX Server 3.5 and ESX Server 3i.

* Each virtual machine has five PCI slots available by default. A cluster uses four of

these slots (two network adapters and two SCSI host bus adapters), leaving one

PCI slot for a third network adapter (or other device), if needed.

* VMware virtual machines currently emulate only SCSI‐2 reservations and do not

support applications using SCSI‐3 persistent reservations.

* Use LSILogic virtual SCSI adapter.

* Use Windows Server 2003 SP2 (32 bit or 64 bit) or Windows 2000 Server SP4.

VMware recommends Windows Server 2003.

* Use two‐node clustering.

* Clustering is not supported on iSCSI or NFS disks.

* NIC teaming is not supported with clustering.

* The boot disk of the ESX Server host should be on local storage.

* Mixed HBA environments (QLogic and Emulex) on the same host are not

supported.

* Mixed environments using both ESX Server 2.5 and ESX Server 3.x are not

supported.

* Clustered virtual machines cannot be part of VMware clusters (DRS or HA).

* You cannot use migration with VMotion on virtual machines that run cluster

software.

* Set the I/O time‐out to 60 seconds or more by modifying

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Disk\

TimeOutValue.

The system might reset this I/O time‐out value if you recreate a cluster. You must

reset the value in that case.

* Use the eagerzeroedthick format when you create disks for clustered virtual

machines. By default, the VI Client or vmkfstools create disks in zeroedthick

format. You can convert a disk to eagerzeroedthick format by importing,

cloning, or inflating the disk. Disks deployed from a template are also in

eagerzeroedthick format.

* Add disks before networking, as explained in the VMware Knowledge Base article

at http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1513.

phew!

2 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

VMware releases Cost Per Application Calculator

March 23rd, 2009

On Monday morning 8am EDT, VMware will have released their Cost Per Application Calculator.  The tool was designed to accurately estimate and compare acquisition cost of a virtualization solution.  VMware has labeled this metric Cost Per Application.  Many market analysts, competitors, and potential customers have been focusing on the sheer cost of purchasing VMware licensing and support without performing the time consuming analysis that would reflect VMware’s complete cost effectiveness.  This calculator was designed to address that.  Goals outlined for the calculator included:

  • Simlified yet accurate metric to evaluate upfront costs only
  • Focus on easily quantifiable cost items that can be entered into the calculator, not indirect savings coming from things like improved productivity or operational efficiency
  • Present a cost comparison between VMware and competitor products using cost per application

VMware’s calculation for Cost Per Application is:

  • Virtualization software
    • Licenses for virtualization software

+

  • Hardware
    • Servers
    • Networking
    • Storage
    • Electricity
    • Datacenter space

+

  • VM Guest OS
    • Licenses for virtual machine operating systems

+

  • Management
    • Management software
    • Management servers and other infrastructure cost
    • Database software and servers

÷

  • Number of Apps Virtualized

=

  • $$ Cost Per Application $$

Note, the Cost Per Application Calculator is not meant to be a replacement of VMware’s TCO and ROI Calculator which is always the optimal methodology to evaluate a software invstment with a complete cost/savings analysis.  VMware’s TCO and ROI Calculator accounts for more items such as multi year views, depreciation, and amortization which the Cost Per Application Calculator does not .

3 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

Virtualization Wiki launched

February 11th, 2009

Rynardt Spies, proprietor of the VirtualVCP blog, has launched VI-Pedia, the Virtualization Open Wiki.

It looks like Rynardt has already begun populating the Wiki with links to VMware’s HCL information.  I think the following information which I posted over at the Petri IT Knowledgebase would also prove to be useful on the Wiki:

Community-Supported Hardware/Software for VMware Infrastructure
http://www.vmware.com/resources/communitysupport/
In 2007, VMware began maintaining a web page of non-HCL hardware that works with VMware ESX. This is a list of hardware and software components that have been reported to work with VMware Infrastructure, either by the community or by the individual vendors themselves. Great for people trying to build a cheap lab out of dubious or whitebox hardware. If your hardware is not on the official VMware HCL, check this list to see if someone has reported that your particular piece of hardware works with ESX.

Additional Resources for Community-Supported Hardware/Software for VMware Infrastructure
http://www.vm-help.com/
http://www.vm-help.com/Whitebox_HCL.php
http://ultimatewhitebox.com/
http://www.vmweekly.com/articles/hardware_recommendations_to_build_cheap_esx_server/1/
http://www.mikedipetrillo.com/mikedvirtualization/2008/10/building-a-500-vmware-esxi-host.html

Thank you for putting this together Rynardt!

1 comment »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags:

NFL’s Super Bowl IT team gets ready for game day

January 31st, 2009

 I think this would be a neat gig, and probably somewhat stressful.  All infrastructure components from simple to the most advanced must be monitored thoroughly and must not be overlooked.  And hey, virtualization is involved which is a plus.  It’s too bad they don’t specify what flavor of virtualization.  Inquiring minds would like to know.  How about it Computerworld?

January 30, 2009 (Computerworld) The National Football League is fielding three teams for Sunday’s Super Bowl. The first two are well known: the Pittsburgh Steelers and Arizona Cardinals. The third, more anonymous one is the 17-member IT staff that the NFL has assigned to work in Tampa, Fla., the site of this year’s game.

That team was tasked with creating a complete IT operation for Super Bowl XLIII in a matter of weeks. Its coaches are Joe Manto, the NFL’s vice president of IT, and Jon Kelly, the league’s director of infrastructure computing. Their opponent is the same one that IT managers face everywhere: anything that can threaten system availability and uptime.

It doesn’t help matters that one of the four IBM BladeCenter S systems being used in Tampa is located on a wood floor in a tent that lacks any climate control capabilities. But so far, so good – and with the four BladeCenter boxes at different locations, and virtualization software ready to provide redundancy, neither Manto nor Kelly seems all that worried.

“It’s very exciting for IT guys,” Manto said of the experience of setting up a systems infrastructure for the Super Bowl. It’s unlike most IT projects, which involve creating systems that will provide ongoing support to users. Instead, the seven-day-a-week effort in Tampa has a short life span and a clear and unmovable deadline.

“That game is going to kick off on Sunday no matter what happens,” Manto said. And by Tuesday, the IT equipment will be disassembled, packed and shipped out of Tampa. “It’s really an open-and-closed operation, which is sort of unique in the IT world,” he said.

The IT staff has set up systems in a hotel to support business operations for about 200 NFL employees who are on-site in Tampa. It also has also built a tech operation at the convention center in Tampa to support 3,500 media representatives who are covering the event; that setup includes wireless networking and automated access to NFL data.

Another system will manage the credentialing of up to 25,000 people – everyone from construction workers to halftime performers. In addition, about 300 PCs have been networked together.

This is the first year that the NFL has completely turned over its server processing workload for the Super Bowl to blade systems. Each BladeCenter chassis includes two blade servers, each with a pair of sockets for quad-core chips. In the past, the league would bring “tens of servers” to the game to provide IT support, Kelly said.

Manto said he will be able to watch parts of the game, primarily on TV monitors, as he moves around Raymond James Stadium in Tampa checking on system operations. But for the most part, Sunday will be a 14-hour workday for the IT staff. “Our main goal,” he said, “is to make sure that everything about this event is accomplished professionally and in a way that gives the fans the best possible experience.”

 Article above originally posted here.

4 comments »

Posted in Virtualization

Tags: