Comments on: Why ESX are not suitable to run on Blade http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/ Wed, 23 May 2012 21:08:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: craig http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-1416 craig Tue, 26 May 2009 01:08:16 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-1416 this post was quite some times which referring to previous technology available on blade. As today, the blade environment should be good to go for virtualize as long as FCOE or HCA integration which provide virtual hba and virtual NIC available, and the memory per blade had been significant increase. But do remember to check out the detail of blade to ensure the chassis design is fully redundant to avoid whole chassis to be down at 1 time. this post was quite some times which referring to previous technology available on blade. As today, the blade environment should be good to go for virtualize as long as FCOE or HCA integration which provide virtual hba and virtual NIC available, and the memory per blade had been significant increase. But do remember to check out the detail of blade to ensure the chassis design is fully redundant to avoid whole chassis to be down at 1 time.

]]> By: Sid http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-1415 Sid Mon, 25 May 2009 19:37:07 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-1415 The Cisco blades are looking pretty decent - at least from their specs. Can you say 384 GB of RAM? http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/16/cisco-unveils-blade-server-memory-pricing/ The Cisco blades are looking pretty decent – at least from their specs. Can you say 384 GB of RAM?

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/16/cisco-unveils-blade-server-memory-pricing/

]]> By: admin http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-290 admin Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:20:44 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-290 Look at this: http://www.dabcc.com/article.aspx?id=9114 Look at this: http://www.dabcc.com/article.aspx?id=9114

]]> By: craig http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-155 craig Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:45:32 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-155 Hi Jason, Absolutely agree with the point you mentioned. Is again depend what is the best fit for every situation. Hi Jason,

Absolutely agree with the point you mentioned. Is again depend what is the best fit for every situation.

]]> By: Jason Willey http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-154 Jason Willey Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:55:51 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-154 Did you take a look at HP's new 495c virtualization blades? http://h18026.www1.hp.com/products/servers/proliant-bl/c-class/495c-g5/specifications.html they look like they would overcome some of the issues you mention, if you had 10GB Ethernet and 8GB fiber.. that could minimize some of the concerns.. but that is a pricey infrastructure. I find the Solid state drive an interesting option as well. If bandwidth is an issue.. you can also use LACP on the switch side to aggregate a larger number of uplinks into a larger pipe at least on the HP blades we have looked at. In my opinion the suitability of blades also depends on your goals. In our case we are looking at the blades for ultra high density virtualization deployments, where we would deploy a large number of small servers, such as web servers, low utilization app servers and the like. If you were looking to virtualize high IO applications, then blades might not be your fit. I think the biggest issue with the blades is the intial ramp up, once they are in they are quite simple and cost effective.. it's getting over the hurdle of that first deployment, and intial financial outlay. I would agree that blades aren't the solution for everything, but then neither is virtualization. There are probably some environments that could benefit from vmware on blades. Did you take a look at HP’s new 495c virtualization blades?
http://h18026.www1.hp.com/products/servers/proliant-bl/c-class/495c-g5/specifications.html

they look like they would overcome some of the issues you mention, if you had 10GB Ethernet and 8GB fiber.. that could minimize some of the concerns.. but that is a pricey infrastructure. I find the Solid state drive an interesting option as well. If bandwidth is an issue.. you can also use LACP on the switch side to aggregate a larger number of uplinks into a larger pipe at least on the HP blades we have looked at.

In my opinion the suitability of blades also depends on your goals. In our case we are looking at the blades for ultra high density virtualization deployments, where we would deploy a large number of small servers, such as web servers, low utilization app servers and the like. If you were looking to virtualize high IO applications, then blades might not be your fit.

I think the biggest issue with the blades is the intial ramp up, once they are in they are quite simple and cost effective.. it’s getting over the hurdle of that first deployment, and intial financial outlay.

I would agree that blades aren’t the solution for everything, but then neither is virtualization. There are probably some environments that could benefit from vmware on blades.

]]> By: craig http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-153 craig Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:10:41 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-153 Thanks for sharing the white paper, the details it had mentioned had been part of my consideration in my experience. The limitation that we do concern is about the ratio you need to achieve example if we talk about 30:1 or 40:1, which large scale of virtualization. Bottleneck happen with the limitted number of network ports available. If you compare with the 4U servers which provide easily more than 10 Network ports to support the teaming, redundancy, HA/DRS, ISCSI and etc. We will not able to have 30 VM sharing for 2Gb or 3Gb or network connection as that will be major impact for performance within the VM. Regarding the blade model, we had look into the HP blade as well. Many opinion are really how much performance do you look when you go for virtualization. We not looking to sacrifice performance to virtualize our environment, indeed, it does improve server performance when we virtualize it. Again appreciate your opinion, is just depend what you want to be achieve. Today, I believe many environment, we no longer looking at ESX servers with 32GB as max, as the reason behind is common with quad core and 6 core is on the way. you will also see 8 cores on the way, with more CPU power you have, absolutely you looking forward to further utilize the computing power you have. Thanks for sharing the white paper, the details it had mentioned had been part of my consideration in my experience. The limitation that we do concern is about the ratio you need to achieve example if we talk about 30:1 or 40:1, which large scale of virtualization. Bottleneck happen with the limitted number of network ports available. If you compare with the 4U servers which provide easily more than 10 Network ports to support the teaming, redundancy, HA/DRS, ISCSI and etc. We will not able to have 30 VM sharing for 2Gb or 3Gb or network connection as that will be major impact for performance within the VM.

Regarding the blade model, we had look into the HP blade as well. Many opinion are really how much performance do you look when you go for virtualization. We not looking to sacrifice performance to virtualize our environment, indeed, it does improve server performance when we virtualize it.

Again appreciate your opinion, is just depend what you want to be achieve. Today, I believe many environment, we no longer looking at ESX servers with 32GB as max, as the reason behind is common with quad core and 6 core is on the way. you will also see 8 cores on the way, with more CPU power you have, absolutely you looking forward to further utilize the computing power you have.

]]> By: Rodos http://malaysiavm.com/blog/why-esx-are-not-suitable-to-run-on-blade/comment-page-1/#comment-152 Rodos Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:37:33 +0000 http://malaysiavm.com/blog/?p=364#comment-152 So you have looked at one blade vendor and model and decided that blades as a whole do not stack up. Your analysis is not quantitative. What you are really taking about is scale-up vs scale-out. A good paper on this from IBM is http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/redp3953.html?Open and the other vendors have similar ones. Not saying I agree or disagree with your statement, just how you get there. So you have looked at one blade vendor and model and decided that blades as a whole do not stack up. Your analysis is not quantitative. What you are really taking about is scale-up vs scale-out. A good paper on this from IBM is http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/redp3953.html?Open and the other vendors have similar ones.

Not saying I agree or disagree with your statement, just how you get there.

]]>