hennish
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

Picking a "new" design scenario vs. picking a redesign scenario

Hi. I'm currently struggling in choosing between two suitable design scenarios/projects for my VCDX submission and defense:

The first one I did a year ago, and it included designing and implementing for new ESXi hosts in a new cluster, but re-using the existing network and MetroCluster storage solution without any changes at all.

The second one is actually ongoing, and is more focused on redesigning an existing environment to make it more efficient in terms of operating cost, licences and HA/DR. The existing storage solution will not be replaced, but we might make some changes regarding replication/DR and other settings and op. procedures.

I'm leaning towards the second one, since I have more current info about it and I'll touch on more aspects of the storage architecture. However, it feels weird to submit a design where I didn't add any new hardware, I just re-did its design, config and added new op. procedures. Am I worrying too much about this? Smiley Happy

I would appreciate your thoughts!

5 Replies
AndreTheGiant
Immortal
Immortal

I suppose you are talking about a VCDX-DCV application.

This could also be fictionary so don't see specific limit in both scenarios.

The main (possible) issue with redesign (or fictionary) projects is that you may not know really deep, or you can make some mistakes (like inconsistence across the documents).

Andre | http://about.me/amauro | http://vinfrastructure.it/ | @Andrea_Mauro
fabro
Contributor
Contributor

I think that a redesign scenario would be really hard to face... You will have to work with a lot of assumptions from the previous design if you don't have access to the original requirements and design decisions. It may also cause you troubles when you have to justify your new decisions.

martin_hosken
VMware Employee
VMware Employee

Take a look at the VCDX-DCV Blueprint. This is what your design will be marked against and you need to ensure that what you submit and ultimately defend meets all the criteria set out in this document.

I agree that you may not have the insight into the existing network/storage infrastructure to answer low-level questioning about it, which you will of course have to do.

Martin Hosken

VCDX #117

Martin Hosken Global Cloud Architect | VCDX #117 | vExpert 2014 Global Cloud Practice – vCloud Air Network | Cloud Services Business Unit
Gortee
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

I have to agree with Martin.  Look at the blueprint and see which design aligns with it best.   I did a brownfield upgrade and redesign with mine and it went great.  But it was 100% about aligning with the blueprint not the complexity of the design. 

Joseph Griffiths

VCDX-DCV #143

Joseph Griffiths http://blog.jgriffiths.org @Gortees VCDX-DCV #143
hennish
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

Thanks for all your comments. I'm currently going with the redesign scenario, and aiming for implementing the new design at the same time as the customer is changing to new production hosts in early 2015. At the same time, I'll merge their Prod and Test/dev environments to make better use of the hardware (less 2-node clusters), since lowering TCO is the top requirement.

At the same time, I will clarify the customer's requirements and constraints and redo any old design decisions if I find they are not fulfilling the requirements.

I will study the VCDX-DCV Blueprint closely and make sure I cover everything there.

Thanks!

0 Kudos