CDC Infrastructure Virtualization

and Shared Services

Technical Briefing Presentation

Commonwealth of Massachusetts
CDC Strategic
Statewide IT Consolidation
Strategic (ITC) Initiative
IT Consolidation (ITC) Initiative

15-Nov-10 by Thanurath Liamnark

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Contact Us : thanurath@hotmail.com 1
 Agenda

• Key Findings & Benefits

• Virtualization Overview

• VM Architecture

• VM Comparison

• VM Cost

• Recommendation

• Reference

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 2

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 3
 Key Findings

Shared Services presents multiple benefits to the VM:

 Cost Reduction and Avoidance through shared infrastructure, labor, and licensing

 Green IT and the efficient use of power, cooling, and resources

 Increased Agility and the ability to implement new services and applications quicker

 Increased Availability through the use of a world-class tier-1 datacenter architecture

 Reduced Administration time through a centralized model of support and access

 Better Capacity Management and scalability through a larger pool of datacenter resources

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 4

 Benefits of virtualization
1. You can run one or more applications that are not supported by the Host O/S
2. Better security and isolation, since malfunctions or malware infection of a guest O/S
does not affect the others
3. Peace of cake creation of test environments
4. Easy cloning of virtual machines on the same physical hardware or across servers
5. Snapshot technique which enables you to revert back to a specific point in time.
Especially useful in case of configuration changes and service pack and patches
malfunctions.
6. Excellent recovery scenarios if you backup in VM level. Since VMs are abstracted
from hardware you can easily move/restore them to new physicals servers without
complications
7. Better utilize hardware resources. VM management software allows you to configure
hardware to virtual resource partitioning and utilization. For example you can set
specific CPU thresholds, memory allocation, disk space allocation, I/O structures, etc.
Also you can let the virtual machine monitor to decide the resources allocation
according to utilization.
8. Reduce physical space consumption and reduce hardware costs. You have fewer
servers to buy.
9. Benefit from the licensing models many O/S vendors as Microsoft are providing. For
example, if you buy Windows 2008 ENT edition you get licenses for 4 virtual
machines.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 5

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 6
 INFRASTRUCTURE VIRTUALISATION MATURITY MODEL

Our Infrastructure Virtualization Maturity Model (IVMM), which covers serve

phased approach to integrating and aligning IT services to business require
customers move up through the model.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 7

 A Brief History of Server Virtualization

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 8

 Types of Virtualization

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 9

 Comparison of virtualization methods

1. Binary Translation
2. Hardware Assisted
3. Paravirtualization

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 10

 Binary Translation
In binary translation the virtualization layer sits at CPU privilege level 0 (most
privileged). The Guest O/S system were supposed to run on level 0, but since
virtual layer occupies that level, it moves guest O/S execution at privilege level 1
and leaves user applications at level 3 as it supposed to be. The non-
virtualizable kernel code of the guest O/S is translated by virtual layer into new
sequences of instructions that have the intended effect on virtual hardware, while
user level code is directly executed on the CPU for high performance. The
benefit of this approach is that the O/S is fully abstracted from the underlying
hardware thus it doesn’t require any modification.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11

 Hardware Assisted
In hardware assisted virtualization the virtual layer sits in a new root mode
privilege level under level 0. Guest O/S privileged and sensitive calls are set to
auto trap to the hypervisor while user request are executed directly to the CPU for
high performance. Hardware assisted virtualization requires a compatible CPU
like intel VT-x and AMD’s AMD-V to work. This technique is not performing as
expected because of the high overhead between guest O/S-to-hypervisor
transition. On the other side hardware assisted virtualization is the future and we
are expecting to see improved performance in next generation releases. At this
moment this technique is utilized in specific cases by vendors like VMware such
as for 64-bit guest support on Intel Processors. O/S is still fully abstracted from
the underlying hardware thus it doesn’t require any modification.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 12

 Paravirtualization
In paravirtualization the Guest O/S kernel is modified to provide a special API
that can be used by the virtual layer to translate non-virtualizable instructions
with hypercalls. Virtualization layer interacts directly with guest O/S thus its lower
virtualization overhead and better performance, though it can vary depending on
the workload. Since paravirtualization requires kernel modification it is not suited
for O/S like MS windows which kernel cannot be modified. Also in production
environments deep kernel modification is a matter of question since it introduces
significant support and maintability issues.
Paravirtualization is used in many cases by vendors in conjunction with binary or
hardware assisted technique to provide better performance. Example of this are
VMtools which are a set of drivers and tools that allow virtual layer to interact
with Guest O/S for better performance and manageability but not in the CPU
level.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 13

 Comparison Structure of virtualization methods

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 14

 Comparison Performance of virtualization methods

Binary Hardware Paravirtualization

Translation Assisted

Guest O/S Unmodified Unmodified Modified

modification

Compatibility Excellent Excellent Poor

Performance Good Fair (will be Good
improved in next
generations)

Vendors Vmware , Vmware, Vmware, Xen

Microsoft, Microsoft,
Parallels Parallels, Xen

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 15

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 16
 Microsoft Hyper-V architecture

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 17

 VMware architecture

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 18

 Citrix XenSrver architecture

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 19

 General Comparison

Name VMware ESX Server Hyper-V Server 2008 R2 Xen Server

Creator VMware Microsoft Xensource

x64 + hardware-assisted
Host CPU x86, x86-64 virtualization (Intel VT-x or x86, x86-64, IA-64
AMD-V)

x64, x86 (up to 8 physical (Same as host, up to 128

Guest CPU x86, x86-64
CPUs) physical CPUs)

Windows 2008 w/Hyper-V

Host OS(s) no host OS Role, Windows Hyper-V NetBSD, Linux, Solaris
Server

Windows, Linux, Solaris, Windows, Linux (SUSE 10 FreeBSD, NetBSD, Linux,

FreeBSD, OSx86 (as
FreeBSD), Virtual appliances,
Guest OS(s)
Netware, OS/2, SCO, BeOS,
Darwin, others: runs Arbitrary
OS[3]
released, more announced)
Solaris, Windows XP &
2003 Server (needs vers.
3.0 and an Intel VT-x
(Vanderpool) or AMD-V
(Pacifica)-capable CPU),
Plan 9

License proprietary proprietary GPL

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 20

 Feature Comparison

Guest OS SMP available? Yes (Add-on) (up to 8 way) Yes (up to 4 vcpus per VM) Yes (v4.0.0: up to 128 vcpus per
VM)

Runs arbitrary OS? Yes Yes Yes

Not required with the exception

of the networking drivers where
Supported guest OS a NAT is required. A modified
Yes Yes
drivers? guest kernel or special hardware
level abstraction is required for
guest OSs.

Method of operation Virtualization Virtualization Paravirtualization and Porting or

Hardware Virtualization

Enterprise Server Consolidation,

Enterprise Server Consolidation, Server/Desktop Consolidation,
Typical use Business Continuity, Dev/Test,
Business Continuity, Dev/Test Dev/Test
Cloud Computing

Up to near native[15] speed.

Substantial performance loss on
Speed relative to Host OS Up to near native[citation needed] Near native some workload (network and
disk intensive especially)[citation
needed]

Commercial support
Yes Yes Yes
available?

Needs administrative rights? Needs Needs Needs

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 21

 Others Feature Comparison

Can boot an OS on
another disk partition  Yes
? NA 
Yes
as guest

USB  Yes
x No ? NA

Yes Yes
GUI   Yes 
Live memory

Yes
x No  Yes
allocation
Yes
3D acceleration  x No  Supported with VMGL

Snapshots per VM  Yes  Yes  Yes

Snapshot of running Yes

system
  Yes  Yes

Yes
Live migration   Yes  Yes

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY VMGL (formerly Xen-GL) allows virtual machines to run OpenGL applications. 22
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 23
 Gartner Magic Quadrant for X86 Virtualization

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 24

 VM Marketing Player

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 25

 Reasons to choose

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 26

 Summarizes of the pros and cons of virtualization

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 27

 What should be factored in acquisition cost?

Virtualization Hardware VM Guest OS Management

software Management

 Licenses for  Licenses for  Management

 Servers
virtualization Virtual machines software
software  Networking operating system  Management
servers and other
 Storage infrastructure cost
 Electricity  Databases
software and
 Datacenter space servers

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 28

 Summary : Standard Basic Comparison

VMware ESX /
Basic Single Server Partitioning  ESXi 4.1  2nd gen Microsoft
Hyper-V  XenServer 5.6

MSCS, but must

High Availability
(failover individual VMs)  VI4 HA  failover all VMs
on a LUN
 Xen HA

Memory Overcommit VMware ESX / XenServer

(higher VM density per host)  ESXi 4.1 x Not available

Ultra-thin virtualization footprint VMware ESXi required 1.8
(better reliability, security)  4.1 only 70 MB x Over 3GB with
Server Core x GB Diskspace

Update
Patching of Offline VMs  Manager x No out-of-box
support in SCCM x No Update
Manager

Clustered FS (enables VM restart &

migration indpnt of LUN mapping)  VMFS x NTFS  Via Storage
ASM
Quick Migration
Live VM Migration (server to serer)  VI4 Enterprise x not live, migrates
all VMs on a LUN
 XenServer
Enterprise

Live VM Migration (disk to disk)  VI4 Enterprise x Not available

 XenServer
Enterprise

Host patching has

Zero VM Downtime Host Patching  VI4 Enterprise x VM downtime  XenServer
Enterprise

Only initial VM XenServer

Dynamic Load Balancing  VI4 Enterprise x placement  Enterprise

No cluster-level
Dynamic Power Management  VI4 Enterprise x power mgmt  XenServer
Enterprise
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 29
 Summary : Others Feature Comparison

Feature VMware VI Enterprise Hyper-V 2008 R2 /SMSE

Bare-metal hypervisor  ESX/ESXi  Hyper-V  XenServer

Centralized hypervisor
 Virtual Center  SMSE (VMM)  XenCenter
management
VMware and Microsoft
management x None  SMSE (VMM) x None

VM backup  VCB (proxy only)  SMSE (DPM)  Snapshot and Revert

Yes
VM High availability/failover  Virtual Center  WS08 Clustering 
VM Live migration  VMotion x None  XenMotion® live
migration

Storage VMotion  Yes x Not yet  Yes

Guest OS
 Yes  SMSE (SCCM)  Yes
patching/management

End-to-end OS monitoring x None  SMSE (Ops Mgr) x None

Host/VM level optimization  DRS  SMSE (PRO) 

Application/service monitoring
 vCenter Application
Discovery
 SMSE (PRO)

Manager/AppSpeed
Integrated physical and virtual
management
 None  SMSE 
VMI: VMware Infrastructure WS08: Windows Server 2008 R2
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY VCB: VMware Consolidated Backup SMSE: System Center Server Management Suite 30
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 31
 VMware VS Microsoft Hyper-V

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 32

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 33
 VMware VS Citrix

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 34

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 35
 Cumulative Investment, Savings & ROI

Break event 1.7 Year

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 36

 Server Consolidation: Cost per VM

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 37

 Hyper-V Implementation method
To manage 100 VMs, MS System Center
requires at least 5 physical servers
SCVMM SCOM SCCM
client client client

SC VM Mgr SC Ops Mgr SC Conf Mgr

Management Root Mgmt Management
Server Server Server
plus
1st Server 2nd Server 3rd Server
SCVMM
Library
Server

SCVMM DB SCOM DB +
Library DB reporting server SCCM DB
SCOM
Note: MS recommends Management
separate VMM server,
VMM Library, and VMM
Server
DB for >20 hosts

4th Server 5th Server Hyper-V

Manager client
Source: Microsoft TechNet
Hyper-V hosts with SMSE licenses
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 38
 VMware Implementation method
To manage 100 VM, VMware V-Center requires 2 physical
servers

vCenter VMware
Management Server Infrastructure
Client

2nd Server

vCenter + VUM DB 1st Server

Managed ESX Hosts

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 39
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 40
 Recommendation #1
Accelerate Virtualization

Physical servers can consistently be reduced by a conservative ratio of 15:1

• Physical Server maintenance costs reduced

• Reduction in data center space, power, and cooling
• Significant reduction in physical network ports
• Increased management centralization reduces support burden on
secretariats to focus on application support

Cost Impact

$2.5M/ month physical server cost can be reduced by $1.5m/month through

virtualization

Next Steps

• Virtualization-First policy needs to be enacted & enforced at the CEO and

CIO levels
• Create a migration plan that maximizes the migration and adoption rate to
reduce costs as quickly as possible

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 41

 Recommendation #2
Adopt Dynamic Provisioning

 Implementing new servers/capacity as needed rather than pre-provisioning

a set amount of capacity at the beginning of the year, costs can be reduced
significantly.

• Defer port and facility charges until needed

• Capacity on demand
• Capacity planning will drive monthly charge backs

Commonwealth Cost Impact

Example Details:
Cost comparison for a 1 yr period
• 26 Servers Total
• 10 Servers Already Running
Total Costs for 1 Year Example:
• 140 Virtual Machines to Start
- Static: $3,039,805
• Distributed VM Adoption through 12
- Dynamic: $2,531,369
months
SAVINGS: $508,437

Next Steps
• Virtualization-First policy needs to be enacted & enforced at the CIO and
SCIO levels
• Create a migration plan that maximizes the migration and adoption rate to
reduce costs as quickly as possible

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 42

 Recommendation #3
Leverage virtualization for Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery

Virtualization increases the stability, reliability, and recoverability of your

server environment
• “Breaking the chains” hardware, software & processor
• Most agency datacenters are not Tier 1
• Virtual servers live on highly-redundant shared storage and can “float”
between physical host servers
• Virtual servers can be easily replicated to DR Sites (Springfield 2012) for
Impact
• Lower Recovery Time Objective
Cost and Risk Impact
• Less DR infrastructure lowers cost and risk
• Server downtime for planned hardware maintenance can be reduced to
zero with the use of vMotion
Next Steps
• Prioritize the physical server workloads and classify the data and
applications
• Determine criteria for advanced recovery options based on defined
classifications

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 43

 Recommendation #4
Develop Cloud Readiness Model and Plan

IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS delivered as part of a cloud strategy that employs
virtualization will lower the overall total cost of ownership

• Collect performance and configuration data on all servers

• Assess applications for latency effects of moving to internal cloud
• Analyze data, build list of virtualization candidates
• Define test plan
• Migrate remaining servers per plan

Commonwealth Cost Impact

Shared services, standards for provisioning and decommissioning of servers
will simply infrastructure deployment, lower cost and help mitigate risk

Next Steps
• Develop Cloud Strategy and high level business case
• Develop Cloud Roadmap and implementation plan
• Deliver Proof-of-Concept

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 44

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 45
 References and Further Reading
ITBully.COM “Virtualization, Paravirtualization, whatever you say!?!?”
http://itbully.com/articles/virtualization-paravirtualization-whatever-you-say

Wikipedia

Virtualization paper –
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization

Comparison of platform virtual machines –

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_platform_virtual_machines#Other_features

Microsoft Hyper-V paper -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V

VMware

VMware Cost-Per-Application Calculator –

http://www.vmware.com/technology/whyvmware/calculator/

Comparison of Hypervisors by VMware -

http://www.vmware.com/technology/whyvmware/architectures.html#c132894

Why choose VMware? -

http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vmware_advantage.pdf

VMware vSphere 4.1 Features and Benefits Compared to Microsoft Hyper-V R2, Citrix XenServer
5.6 and Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization 2.2 KVM
http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vmware-vsphere-features-comparison-ch-en.pdf
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 46
 References and Further Reading
Citrix

XenServer features by edition -

http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/subfeature.asp?contentID=2300456

Microsoft

Virtualization with Hyper-V: Supported Guest Operating Systems –

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-supported-guest-os.aspx

Hyper-V Server 2008 R2 -

http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/default.aspx

Gartner

Magic Quadrant for x86 Server Virtualization Infrastructure : Gartner May2010 -

http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/cloud/Gartner-VMware-Magic-Quadrant.pdf

Virtualization with VMware or Hyper-V What You Need to Know : Gartner Webinar –
http://www.gartner.com/it/content/1184500/1184548/november25_virtualization_tombittman_final.pdf

ITComparison.com

Microsoft Windows 2008 R2 Hyper-V VS VMware vSphere

http://www.itcomparison.com/Virtualization/VMwareESX4vsMshypervr2/VMwareESX4vWindows2008R2HyperV.h
tm
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 47