advice on storage and x3550 needed

[lyngsie08]

Hi all,

We're going to setup our first esx server on a ibm x3550 server. Though the first year we've planned to let this esx host non-critical servers, we would like to supplement another x3550 esx server to benefit from HA and DRS and then move on to more critical servers well into next year. I'm aware a SAN would be the most efficient, but this will include a big investment in storage that has to wait until medio 2009. My question is how could we invest in a storage that would give us the possibility to start testing and using HA and DRS but without the huge investment in a SAN?

[maishsk]

You could always put together a desktop as an NFS storage to work both HA and Vmotion from

Openfiler is a good example


Maish

Systems Administrator & Virtualization Architect

[admin]

SAN was the way to go, we always say netapp - the features blow SANs away, don't get me wrong SANs are great but when it comes to price v performance SANs are out

[mreferre]

Given your requirements I would suggest either an iSCSI storage server (like the IBM DS3300) or something like this: http://it20.info/blogs/main/archive/2008/05/19/121.aspx

Massimo.

[lyngsie08]

Thanks for some great info already.

I've spent some time on the suggested solutions, and what I've concluded so far is that the cost for using Openfiler/Lefthand/Datacore and emualte a SAN using plain x86/64 architecture, could easilly be as expensive as an iscsi storage server.

But I have a question about the storage server: Wouldn't I still need at least two storage servers to get true HA?

Finally a question about Netapp:How does netapp differ from a normal san?

[mreferre]

the cost for using Openfiler/Lefthand/Datacore and emualte a SAN using plain x86/64 architecture, could easilly be as expensive as an iscsi storage server.

This is true. In fact implementing LH/Datacore in the way i described in the article I pointed out gives you more than just an iSCSI share.

Wouldn't I still need at least two storage servers to get true HA?

"True" has a different meaning to different people. Generally speaking a fully redundant Storage server (2 x controllers, Raid levels etc etc) is supposed to be true HA however purists tend to say u need two separate Storage servers to reach even higher uptime. The problem is how you keep these storage servers sync'ed together and how you make your failover automatic/transparent.

One of the advantage of using LH/Datacore the way I described in the article allows you to do exactly that (not very easy to implement in a physical iSCSI storage server deployment w/o adding third party software or expensive replication licenses).

Massimo.

[lyngsie08]

Thanks for making it more clear to me.

Based on these advices we've decided to go with NetApp as we already have some expertise on this.

We're still not sure if the x3550 is the hw to go for, but it'll at least suffice for the first year during test and running non-critical servers.

[admin]

See the following for more benefit of NFS (NetApp specifically)over FC or other block protocols,

http://communities.vmware.com/thread/181896

The 3550 is not a typicl platform for consolidation and VMWare. It is more likely to be used as a VC server. The lack of PCI slots of NICs and limited CPU processing power is the primary reason. You pay the same license cost for a Dual socket single core as a dual socket Quad core but the latter gives a lot more price/performance. That being said you could certainly use it to start.

[maishsk]

Beg to differ!!

All our hosts are using either x3650 or x3550 servers, running at the moment approimately 30 vm's per host with 2xQC and 16gb RAM. We are going to double the RAM, because we are nowhere close to utilizing CPU resources, but are starting to hit a bottleneck with the RAM.

It all depends on your workload...
Maish

Systems Administrator & Virtualization Architect

[admin]

I'm not vendor specific, but here are what I recommend to customers who are.

Medium Sized Infrastructure

IBM 3650 or HP DL380

Enterprise Sized Infrastructure

IBM 3850/3950 or HP DL585

Blades can be a good option as both have good products.

As you are going for NetApp as I earlier suggested I'd go with the IBM 3650's they are a sweet box, just take a age to boot. Plus with the new IBM Director (impressive) your on your way to virtual bliss

[admin]

Point taken but I said "not typically" and I think that is still accurate for the reasons I listed. I will admit I did not realize you cut fit 2 x Quad Core processors in a 3550. My personal sweet spot is a 3u box such as 3650 or DL380 as I think it affords the right balance between a decent consolidation ratio and not placing too may eggs in one basket. How many physical NICs do you have in that configuration ? ? ?

[admin]

typically we want to support the following networking physical ports ; therefore --

vSwitch 0 (these have a active and standby to each other)

1 x SC vmnic0

1 x VMotion vmnic3 (avoiding been both onboard or on the same Quad port NIC)

vSwitch1

2x NFS vmnic1,vmnic5

vSwitch2

4x Virtual Machines (2 will suffice I guess but the more is the better as the price aint the much) vmnic1, vmnic2 etc. (don't select all vmnics from same pNIC)

vSwitch3

2x iSCSI traffic within the VM using M$ Initiator vmnics again spread accross different pNICS (standard vSwitch) allows for RAW storage presentation to the VM via iSCSI - superb for NetApp as the features for replication, DR are awsome

vSwitch4

No pNICs internal routing testing I guess (cheap Lab Mananger!!)

PS 3650 ships with Quad Cores, did aload last week.

PPS they are migrating from 3950M2's to the sleeker 3650's

Message was edited by: ZippyDaMCT

[admin]

Sorry ZippyDaMCT, I was actually asking maishsk how he was configuring his virtual networks on a 3550.

[admin]

OK sorry, but anyways it shouldn't differ really what model/vendor you use. What I stated is what I'd do it it was DL360/DL585 HP/IBM Blades IBM 3650/380/390M2 or Dell

[maishsk]

Each host comes with 6 NICS

2xVM(+SC)

2xNFS(+Vmotion)

1xSC

Still Have not found the ideal use for NIC # 6 but then again have not found a Card that has 3 NIC ports on it either..

Maish

Systems Administrator & Virtualization Architect

[maishsk]

And I do agree that the x3650 would be a better choice though if you ever want to expand RAM/CPUs(price difference is not more than $300-$400 between them)

Maish

Systems Administrator & Virtualization Architect

[mreferre]

Given the ton of the discussion (i.e. server models and storage to use) I want to throw in this other alternative for additional thoughts:

http://it20.info/blogs/main/archive/2008/11/14/162.aspx

Massimo.