Tag Archives | review

Quick Review: VMware View 5- Building a Successful Virtual Desktop

vmware_view_book

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In light of the fact that I have been living in the world of End User Computing (EUC) for a while now, especially with my work around VMware Project Octopus and now Horizon Data, I have been brushing up on my VMware View knowledge to round out my expertise.

As such, I wanted to pick up the most recent, up-to-date book on View. This came in the form of: VMware View 5: Building a Successful Virtual Desktop by Paul O’Doherty from VMware Press. This book was billed as follows:

Deliver high-value virtual desktop infrastructure and a superior user experience

Companies that have already realized the benefits of VMware server virtualization are now discovering that VMware View 5 offers equally powerful opportunities on the client side. VMware View 5 is a comprehensive enterprise-class solution. But, until now, crucial information about it has been scattered throughout dozens of technical documents. In VMware View 5, leading desktop virtualization expert Paul O’Doherty combines this critical information with deep insights and best practices from his extensive enterprise deployment experience.

O’Doherty walks through every step, from the earliest planning phases through configuration, implementation, and management. He addresses important considerations ranging from changes to end-user experience through support and performance management. You’ll learn how to plan and smoothly stage virtual desktop infrastructure deployments, and avoid pitfalls associated with latency, scalability, storage, and networking. 

Whether you’re an architect, system administrator, or virtualization consultant, this guide’s proven techniques can help you dramatically improve IT productivity as you build environments that are far more flexible and easier to manage.

Review

I feel this book is great for someone new to View or someone who has a the basics down and is looking to cover all the aspects of the product.

All of the elements of a successful View implementation are covered, including technical details of View Persona, ThinApp, vShield Endpoint, vCenter Operations Manager, and View Adapter.

Pros:

  • Great reference
  • Can skip to whatever section you are interested in, without reading cover to cover

Cons:

  • Includes information about vSphere that can be found in other sources
  • Would have loved to see more on the planning of a View implementation

Overall, I would highly recommend giving this book a try! 5/5

*Disclosure: I received an electronic copy of this book for evaluation purposes. This in no way affect this review or any review done on this site.

3,431 total views, 5 views today

0

Quick Review: NetApp Flash Cache (PAM II)

I don’t normally do reviews on this site, but since there is a lack of real world information from customers regarding NetApp’s highly-touted Flash Cache (in the past referred to as PAM II), I thought I would make an exception this time.

Background

Our environment consists of a FAS3160A (active-active configuration) with 4 disk shelves between the 2 filer heads. This is a fairly small environment with only 56 total disks, but were are running some intensive production workloads (i.e. Lotus Notes, MSSQL, MySQL, etc.) as well as some externally accessed Java application servers with their associated SLAs. We are also hosting small amounts of NFS and CIFS data in lieu of Windows file server VMs for some users. In order to conserve on disk capacity, we are also implementing de-duplication and thin provisioning on production workloads since we value a lean and efficient storage environment.

Of late, we have been having some performance issues. These consisted mostly of high disk latencies (averaging above 45ms) at the ESX hosts as well as some complaints from internal end users over occassional slow access and performance issues for a few of the services we provide.

Planning

Even though we just upgraded to the FAS3160A from a FAS3020 in February, I have been planning proactive performance upgrades since before that implementation aimed at keeping the performance at a high level. We ran into some scaling issues in the past so I didn’t want to repeat any of the same mistakes. I did a lot of analysis on storage performance and technical documentation prior to deciding that the Flash Cache should be a good option for our environment. Our read/write ratio averages about 10:1.

Coinciding too with the Flash Cache upgrade is a protocol migration away from iSCSI and to 8Gbps FC. I looked at going all the way forward to FCoE, but unfortunately our current blade chassis and interconnects only support an upgrade to 8Gbps FC in our current configuration. We will plan this for the next upgrade cycle.

Purchase

NetApp and our reseller did a good job at making the price competive which is good, due to our limited budget for this hardware. I considered other options, but the Flash Cache gives us the best “bang for the buck”. I suspect not many customers are using this hardware in Japan, so perhaps we can serve as a case study for the benefits of Flash Cache when all is said and done. The ordering process was smooth and the hardware arrived with 15 days for installation.

Installation

The nice thing about having an active-active configuration is that we were able to add the hardware with absolutely no downtime! The first head unit tray(?) was removed after performing a cluster takeover and (2) 8Gbps FC cards and (1) Flash Cache 256GB card were installed and (1) Quad port NIC was removed. The same process was then repeated for the other filer head. I will use a similar procedure to update the ONTAP OS firmware at a date in the near future.

Performance

Prior to the Flash Cache installation, we were seeing consistent average disk latency of about 45ms across all 8 of our ESX hosts. This should be around 15ms or less to provide adequate response times for our VMs and finally to the end users. It was my goal to accomplish this with the Flash Cache as well as alleviate some of the high disk utilization that we were seeing (especially during backup windows) from all of the sequential disk reads.

The Flash Cache takes several hours to “warm-up” or load frequently used data into the cache. Since we performed the installation on Fri. night, I took my first look sometime on Sat. and the results were about what I expected.

Some of the rough quantitative results:

  • Reduced average disk latency to less than 25ms. This includes the local disk adapter which seems to affect the average. If I look at the specific disk adapter for the iSCSI devices, I see latencies of less than 10ms average.
  • Reduced disk utilization from 70-80% down to 20-30%. Less random reads on the disks frees them up for more important tasks (like sequential reads) for which read cache is less ideally suited.
  • Backup timeframes reduced by a factor of 4.

Conclusion

If you don’t want the expense due to increased energy/cooling/space requirements, the NetApp Flash Cache is a worthy alternative. Remember, the Flash Cache is laser-focused specifically on random read workloads (good news for most VMware environments), but do your homework and perform lots of tests and analyses to check (and double-check) the potential performance benefits to make sure it has a positive ROI for your environment.

Pairing the Flash Cache with an upgrade to a more modern, industry recommended protocol (1Gbps iSCSI > 8Gbps FC, in my example) can help keep the performance of the system ahead of the curve.

The Flash Cache also serves as good alternative, especially if you don’t require the additional disk space provided by adding additional spindles to the environment. This will likely be our next bottleneck now that the performance issues are under control… at least for the time being.

1,886 total views, no views today

2

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes