When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?
-
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@wirestyle22 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@wirestyle22 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@JaredBusch said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@JaredBusch said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
with VMWare at 5k a pop
FFS, you have no idea WTF you are talking about. Stop arguing and go learn. Then you can discuss instead of argue.
This is the product right?
£4712 with VAT... not far out of the 5k I said no?
So where are you saying I'm wrong here?
Would like like me to send you a quote for an hour of consulting time to help you understand?
How much is an hour of consulting time? I fI can afford it I'd probably hire you to teach me. I'm very serious
Hahah lol
No, i'd like you to not be rude actually. From the page I am looking at, that product is the minimum you need for vMotion - which is what we were just talking about where I referred to the price... so... yeah...
I'm not the one being rude here.
He's definitely rude (and he knows it) but he's also correct 99% of the time
Yeah, probably. But i'm just curious as to why i'm wrong here. Not being rude about it from my side at all. It does look to be 5k. And i'd still need the same multiple IIS servers, and SQL servers... and yes, i'd want them sitting behing something like HA proxy. At that point I have application level high availability, so even less need for vMotion.
But at that point you'd have at least 12 individual system before you're even managing the Hypervisor its self.
That's a stupidly long dependency chain with a lot of things that can go wrong. Not even mentioning the time to setup and test the system. And then to find someone who would want to support it from the Bus effect.
Yeah, agree i'd have 12 systems. Of course I have 12. Why on earth wouldn't I. If I had only 1 x SQL Server, or 1 x IIS, whenever I do updates... that's the app down. Surely I'm not the only person to see that? I need application HA in addition to the hardware level... and in this case, once I have that... vMotion does nothing for me.
Every system has down time, even wall street. There is no such thing as 100% up time. You're in a dream world if you think this is a viable, cost effective solution.
And unless you are Wall Street, the entire setup here would only make sense for the 1% of the top 1% of organizations.
Where did I say 100% uptime? I didn't. 12 VMs is small. Everywhere has downtime, yes, but this isn't complex and for IIS and SQL Server etc... this is not an unreasonable setup. Not hard to manage or design either. I'm shocked y'all think its suck a crazy setup.
12 VM's is complex for the reported 99.999% up time you'd gain. You're creating a scenario that very few businesses need to justify vMotion (a single feature of ESXi) as not being a viable option.
You're purposefully attempting to say ESXi sucks because you can do something else with Hyper-V.
No, he can do that SPECIFIC thing for free with Hyper-V
-
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@wirestyle22 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
whenever I do updates... that's the app down
You said the above which leads us to believe that you thought there would be 100% uptime. That's why we said that it doesn't really exist
If I have 1 x IIS server VM, using 1 x SQL Server VM (2 VMs), when I update either one, my app is down.Having 2 x SQL for SQL cluster, and 2 x IIS behind a haproxy is not weird... and means updates do not cause downtime.
Yes, this is very common. And even more common outside of the Windows world as it is generally free there.
-
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@wirestyle22 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
whenever I do updates... that's the app down
You said the above which leads us to believe that you thought there would be 100% uptime. That's why we said that it doesn't really exist (outside of possibly really huge enterprise systems that I have never seen)
Very few people have seen systems like this. The top 1% of IT engineers in the world are the only people to see systems like this.
Ok, so... vMotion allows you to plan a move of a VM from node1 to node2. Then you can perform downtime to node1. That's hardware HA. HypreV allows you to do that... benefit of buying the VMWare for this = 0. In that case, the 1x VM its self goes down, then that's downtime to the service as its not application level HA... if that's ok by you then fine, even more reason not to get VMWare. If you need the app to be able to stay up if the VM is restarted, you need application level HA with SQL server and IIS etc.. in which case, doesn't matter again if you have VMWare.
Correct
-
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 So again, you're taking the 1 feature I listed randomly and harping on it.
No, he's responding to you having used that one feature as a selling point and you keep defending it. That's what is going on. It made no sense to have mentioned vMotion in the first place as that's not a VMware feature. So what he is asking, and not being told, is what VMware advantages there actually are since all mentioned are available free with every hypervisor.
-
@bnrstnr said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
I can see where @Jimmy9008 is coming from, vMotion is literally the only specific feature that has been brought up so far in this thread
Exactly. He's not harping on about it, it's the only thing presented to him as a feature. Whoever brought it up is the only one harping. That it even came up is the issue.
-
@stacksofplates said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@matteo-nunziati said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
I absolutely need vMotion to ensure my systems are up 100% of the time, I have a server infrastructure of 3 or more hosts.
vMotion is live migration + HA? Don't know if it works with SAN or without. but for live migration at least vSAN is required for 100% uptime: share nothing live migration can't work. You can accomplish this other ways:
- KVM has ovirt+gluster
- hyper-v has native starwind
- starwind seems to be available outside windows
- Xen has HA Lizard - I think.
don't know about the setup time and labor, this could be the only discriminant. in Italy vMotion + vSAN is so expensive that I can pay for setup of other solutions and stay in budget.
Maintainance costs is probably another factor. But here others win hands down. RTO and RPO can't be discussed because this is HA.
Can you share some real cases of why you think you have to ditch others for VMWare? just curious. This has been my hypervisors week
The difference is that VMWare has a solution for 100% uptime with "VMware VMotion (which) enables the live migration of running virtual machines from one physical server to another with zero downtime, continuous service availability, and complete transaction integrity."
That is HA without the need for a vSAN or other Highly available storage. The hypervisor has this built in.
... isn't vMotion then exactly the same as in Hyper-V 'Move' then? I can move VMs in Hyper-V from one host, to another, without shared storage, and with 0 downtime.
vMotion sounds just like the move option in Hyper-V. Nothing special. If HostA crashes, does vMotion move the VM to another host instantly without any downtime to service and no shared storage? - Now that would be different...
It does.
No it needs shared storage. Either vSAN or iSCSI or NFS. Every hypervisor I've seen can do it with shared storage. Even KVM has built in mechanisms to live migrate between two live hosts with shared storage.
And none can do it without. If they don't have shared storage and the storage fails... that's it, there is nothing to motion over. That's literally the same as restoring from a backup once the backup is gone... um, there is nothing to restore FROM! It is already gone.
-
@John-Nicholson said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
Operational reasons. I can throw a rock and hit someone who knows how to manage ESXi and vSphere.
This I consider a negative. This is the Windows support problem. It's impossible to tell who actually knows Windows or VMware from someone who say it run once because using the GUI and tools and Googling things make it so easy for anyone to bluff long enough to cause a lot of damage.
This is why we find it so easy to find Linux support even though the pool is so much smaller. There isn't the insane chaff to wheat ratio!
-
@John-Nicholson said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
Where did I say 100% uptime? I didn't. 12 VMs is small. Everywhere has downtime, yes, but this isn't complex and for IIS and SQL Server etc... this is not an unreasonable setup. Not hard to manage or design either. I'm shocked y'all think its suck a crazy setup.
Why I like having hypervisor clusters even for app clusters is it let me do host maintenance in the middle of the day when resources are cheap vs at night where they are expensive (overtime pay, comp time, or just burning out my operations staff).
This is what offshoring is for
Do maintenance with the least cost and least impact.And I've seen this logic being down trading systems when vMotion failed during the day. It's a risk that people often overlook. In this particular case the people in question knew they weren't allowed to do it and thought that no one would know because it was VMware. We asked for them to be fired because of it.
-
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@John-Nicholson I agree, there are reasons to need these kinds of systems, but they are far and few in between.
The argument being made here by @Jimmy9008 is I can do it on something other than ESXi, which sure he can do so. But its added complexity for little gain.
No, there is NO added complexity. None. that's where you are confused.
-
@NetworkNerd said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
In the words of @Lost_Signal773, HA is something you do and not something you buy.
That's from @John-Nicholson
-
@NetworkNerd said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
There's also storage vMotion, which allows you to move the VM files from one storage device to another with no downtime (VM does not change hosts in this case). There is also enhanced vMotion, which allows you to move a VM from one host to another (CPU and RAM) and also move its actual files also (from one storage device to another).
That's a totally different thing, similar name, not similar in what it is. In no way a "level" of vMotion and not shared in utility or mechanism. And also available free with competing products.
-
@scottalanmiller said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@NetworkNerd said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
In the words of @Lost_Signal773, HA is something you do and not something you buy.
That's from @John-Nicholson
Edited my post above
-
@NetworkNerd said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
With Hyper-V I must have a license of Windows.
No you do not, not at all. Hyper-V is 100% free, it has no ties to Windows whatsoever.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/5272/somethings-you-need-to-know-about-hyper-v
This is the top myth about Hyper-V, we must average debunking it two or more times a day on SW.
-
@Tim_G said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@John-Nicholson said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Tim_G It's free like a puppy
VMware is free like a kitten
A crippled kitten with distemper.
-
@stacksofplates said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@stacksofplates said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@matteo-nunziati said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
I absolutely need vMotion to ensure my systems are up 100% of the time, I have a server infrastructure of 3 or more hosts.
vMotion is live migration + HA? Don't know if it works with SAN or without. but for live migration at least vSAN is required for 100% uptime: share nothing live migration can't work. You can accomplish this other ways:
- KVM has ovirt+gluster
- hyper-v has native starwind
- starwind seems to be available outside windows
- Xen has HA Lizard - I think.
don't know about the setup time and labor, this could be the only discriminant. in Italy vMotion + vSAN is so expensive that I can pay for setup of other solutions and stay in budget.
Maintainance costs is probably another factor. But here others win hands down. RTO and RPO can't be discussed because this is HA.
Can you share some real cases of why you think you have to ditch others for VMWare? just curious. This has been my hypervisors week
The difference is that VMWare has a solution for 100% uptime with "VMware VMotion (which) enables the live migration of running virtual machines from one physical server to another with zero downtime, continuous service availability, and complete transaction integrity."
That is HA without the need for a vSAN or other Highly available storage. The hypervisor has this built in.
... isn't vMotion then exactly the same as in Hyper-V 'Move' then? I can move VMs in Hyper-V from one host, to another, without shared storage, and with 0 downtime.
vMotion sounds just like the move option in Hyper-V. Nothing special. If HostA crashes, does vMotion move the VM to another host instantly without any downtime to service and no shared storage? - Now that would be different...
It does.
No it needs shared storage. Either vSAN or iSCSI or NFS. Every hypervisor I've seen can do it with shared storage. Even KVM has built in mechanisms to live migrate between two live hosts with shared storage.
So VMWare has FT now and can do shared nothing with 4 VMs but is really resource heavy. @John-Nicholson set me straight.
Except for the VMs, they are totally shared. It's the same kind of overhead that you get in mainframes or NEC's ridiculous two node piece of crap.
-
@scottalanmiller said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@stacksofplates said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@stacksofplates said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Jimmy9008 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@matteo-nunziati said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
I absolutely need vMotion to ensure my systems are up 100% of the time, I have a server infrastructure of 3 or more hosts.
vMotion is live migration + HA? Don't know if it works with SAN or without. but for live migration at least vSAN is required for 100% uptime: share nothing live migration can't work. You can accomplish this other ways:
- KVM has ovirt+gluster
- hyper-v has native starwind
- starwind seems to be available outside windows
- Xen has HA Lizard - I think.
don't know about the setup time and labor, this could be the only discriminant. in Italy vMotion + vSAN is so expensive that I can pay for setup of other solutions and stay in budget.
Maintainance costs is probably another factor. But here others win hands down. RTO and RPO can't be discussed because this is HA.
Can you share some real cases of why you think you have to ditch others for VMWare? just curious. This has been my hypervisors week
The difference is that VMWare has a solution for 100% uptime with "VMware VMotion (which) enables the live migration of running virtual machines from one physical server to another with zero downtime, continuous service availability, and complete transaction integrity."
That is HA without the need for a vSAN or other Highly available storage. The hypervisor has this built in.
... isn't vMotion then exactly the same as in Hyper-V 'Move' then? I can move VMs in Hyper-V from one host, to another, without shared storage, and with 0 downtime.
vMotion sounds just like the move option in Hyper-V. Nothing special. If HostA crashes, does vMotion move the VM to another host instantly without any downtime to service and no shared storage? - Now that would be different...
It does.
No it needs shared storage. Either vSAN or iSCSI or NFS. Every hypervisor I've seen can do it with shared storage. Even KVM has built in mechanisms to live migrate between two live hosts with shared storage.
So VMWare has FT now and can do shared nothing with 4 VMs but is really resource heavy. @John-Nicholson set me straight.
Except for the VMs, they are totally shared. It's the same kind of overhead that you get in mainframes or NEC's ridiculous two node piece of crap.
Oh, NEC - that was one weird night at SpiceCorps.
-
@John-Nicholson said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
It's not lazy it's considering licensing of application stuff, as well as operational costs. Back in the day Hypervisor HA was considered exotic and expensive (and it often was). Now it's mundane (tons of ops people know how to deploy/support it), ....
Is that really true? So many people use it without understanding it. The "using it because it seems easy" mindset makes for a support nightmare, similar to what Windows faces with their ecosystem. So many things are done incorrectly because it seems like you need to knowledge to do it. Then everything blows up.
In many ways, IT being too easy makes it dangerous in the real world.
-
@Tim_G said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@John-Nicholson said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@Tim_G I'll take it. My dog requires 3 walks a day, and play time. My cats I had could be ignored for a week or more without much effort given enough food/water and fresh litter was left out.
True, but they don't do anything useful without an insane amount of training, time, and money ^_^
And the last time (admittedly some time ago) that we hired VMware training, the class trained the VMware staffer because Vmware didn't know its own product. I've had a certain lack of faith in it ever since Xen and Zones folks were the ones teaching VMware how to use its own software to the "expert" that VMware had on staff.
I'm sure Vmware has loads of great people, but even Vmware stuggled to find what I'd call competent users internally whereas finding people who knew Xen was pretty easy (and still is.)
-
@matteo-nunziati said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@scottalanmiller said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@matteo-nunziati said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:
The cost of the solution isn't expensive if your business requires those features.
example?
Fault Tolerance with vendor support for it. Technically not limited to Vmware, but essentially limited to it. I believe Suse with Xen is the only other vendor who offers OEM vendor support for that.
Agree 100%. It is one of the cheapest supported solutions. Issue is if you can afford it! Usually not here.
Of course exceptions can be around. But are exceptions imho in the small business.Not sure it is the cheapest. Compare to Red Hat, I bet RH is cheaper. I've not compared, I'm just guessing.
-
@scottalanmiller By this logic you should always use DB2 over Microsoft SQL, zOS over Linux or Windows, ARM or Power Processors over X86 and Juniper over... Well anything that isn't so damn weird and complicated as JuneOS.
IT naturally gravitates to commodity platforms for general purpose non-speciality stuff.
