XenServer vs ESXi
-
@coliver said:
It is your place to point out poor decision making and poor proposals of the MSP though.
That's the question. Is it?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
So back to the case at hand:
XenServer has many advantages...
- You already know it.
- It is incredibly easy to use.
- It is very performant and this has been shown.
- The devil that you know.
- Zero cost for everything, totally zero.
- Full Paravirtualization Option for Linux workloads.
- Updates are also free.
- No overhead cost for license management.
- No salesman providing guidance.
- Backups are possible for free.
- Far greater feature set than any possible VMware option.
- HA is free
- vMotion is free
- Storage vMotion is free
- Many more free features
- No scale limitations (within reason)
- Local support available
- Minimal technical debt incurred.
This is a great list. Covers pretty much all the main bases.
-
I care... I'll always care... Especially if I like my job... I was at my last job about 3 years too long...but I hung around because I cared... I'd bring this up to my boss in a heart beat... With a big ? hanging over my head, like "Why?" ... and he can either tell me the reason and give me a chance to shoot holes in his reasons, or tell me not to worry about it... At which point, I still care about it, but my duty is done.
-
@dafyre said:
I care... I'll always care... Especially if I like my job... I was at my last job about 3 years too long...but I hung around because I cared... I'd bring this up to my boss in a heart beat... With a big ? hanging over my head, like "Why?" ... and he can either tell me the reason and give me a chance to shoot holes in his reasons, or tell me not to worry about it... At which point, I still care about it, but my duty is done.
I suffer the same problem! I do care.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@DustinB3403 said:
Nope. . . Hyper-V was installed directly into the existing DC02, and VM's setup while the system was functioning.
Talk about red flags... not only does this VAR/MSP not understand how Hyper-V, a product they had proposed, works but they don't understand the licensing limitation/expectation of it...
Or worse, they DO understand the licensing! Which is worse, being clueless on the basics or being aware of what they were doing and still doing it?
The former gives them the benefit of the doubt the latter seems almost malicious although this is another case of, "Does it matter?" While the latter is worse then the former they both equally demonstrate how inadequate this VAR is.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
So there is a way to do what you are describing but it doesn't work out super well for you (but works) but generally people mess it up and end up not being properly licensed and overusing what they have.
I think I've got you. So the I'm guessing the correct approach would be something like:
Demote the DC
Remove the DC from the domain
Do a fresh, clean install of Windows on the host
Install HyperV
Install a fresh, clean VM of Windows and setup as new DCWhich, IIRC, is exactly what we did with ESXi, except that we installed the hypervisor directly and then install VCenter appliance to manage it.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
So there is a way to do what you are describing but it doesn't work out super well for you (but works) but generally people mess it up and end up not being properly licensed and overusing what they have.
I think I've got you. So the I'm guessing the correct approach would be something like:
Demote the DC
Remove the DC from the domain
Install HyperV Server 2012R2
Install a fresh, clean VM of Windows and setup as new DCWhich, IIRC, is exactly what we did with ESXi, except that we installed the hypervisor directly and then install VCenter appliance to manage it.
You don't really need a full version of Windows Server for your hypervisor in this case... Hyper-V Server 2012R2 is exactly the same thing just with all the extras cut out of it.
-
@coliver said:
It is your place to point out poor decision making and poor proposals of the MSP though. If this were happening to my company I would bring this up to my boss (and his boss) almost immediately. Especially if they are going to spend money on a product that has no intrinsic benefit over what you are currently using. Especially since you already have that solution running and proven in house.
I wouldn't go to my boss's boss over something like this. I don't always agree with my boss's decision, but he's my boss and paid the big bucks to make the big decisions. I'd hope my boss's boss would realise if he was an idiot, but if he doesn't, I don't see it as my place to point it out. I'd probably get a new job before I went over my boss's head about something.
-
@Carnival-Boy Sometimes your boss may not really even know what you have already vs what you are trying to buy. I've seen this happen a few times. It never hurts to have an odd number of people involved in decision making -- especially where (potentially) large amounts of money are involved.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@coliver said:
It is your place to point out poor decision making and poor proposals of the MSP though. If this were happening to my company I would bring this up to my boss (and his boss) almost immediately. Especially if they are going to spend money on a product that has no intrinsic benefit over what you are currently using. Especially since you already have that solution running and proven in house.
I wouldn't go to my boss's boss over something like this. I don't always agree with my boss's decision, but he's my boss and paid the big bucks to make the big decisions. I'd hope my boss's boss would realise if he was an idiot, but if he doesn't, I don't see it as my place to point it out. I'd probably get a new job before I went over my boss's head about something.
I'll say I see your point but not that I necessarily agree with it. Sometimes your boss is coming at this from a different perspective and you may need a third set of eyes to determine what the best approach is. However if this is an ongoing constant thing where this MSP/VAR is proposing solutions that are inadequate or don't correctly match the environment there may be something else going on that you need to bring to someones attention.
-
I always get advice from my staff and encourage them to tell me I'm an idiot and explain why. But at the end of the day the buck stops with me. I don't expect them to always agree with me, but I wouldn't be happy if they took that to my boss.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I always get advice from my staff and encourage them to tell me I'm an idiot and explain why. But at the end of the day the buck stops with me. I don't expect them to always agree with me, but I wouldn't be happy if they took that to my boss.
I'm of the opposite opinion, I prefer to not have management block upward concerns. I'm not a manager, but when I am I like companies that encourage people to take their concerns "up the stack." Not in a sneaky way but in a "we don't agree, let's take this up a layer and see what someone higher up thinks of our concerns."
-
@Dashrender said:
I suffer the same problem! I do care.
Me too, and that makes me have to be careful where I work to make sure that they care too.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I think I've got you. So the I'm guessing the correct approach would be something like:
Demote the DC
Remove the DC from the domain
Do a fresh, clean install of Windows on the host
Install HyperV
Install a fresh, clean VM of Windows and setup as new DCYes, that's ideal. Since you need to do some maneuvering of the DC workload, doing the fresh install is pretty trivial (since you need to clean off that image anyway.) If it wasn't for that, might make sense to clean it and do the role install instead to save time. But that install should only be a few minutes except for the most extreme cases. Very vanilla.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I always get advice from my staff and encourage them to tell me I'm an idiot and explain why. But at the end of the day the buck stops with me. I don't expect them to always agree with me, but I wouldn't be happy if they took that to my boss.
The IT World, especially needs more bosses like you! 8-)
But sometimes bosses can be hard headed and need someone above them to do a head-check and make sure they're not being an idiot. I think that in most cases going over your direct boss should be reserved for times when you are being mistreated, and not just because you don't agree with your boss.
Generally, I'm not talking about going over the boss's helmet... More to the side... and being in a meeting with my boss, and his boss to talk about $project, so we have three heads are better than 2 type deal going on... Especially if there are no real teams involved.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'd probably get a new job before I went over my boss's head about something.
That feels extreme
I would sure hope that if I had employees willing to quite because they thought that middle management was on the take or just incompetent that they would at very least bring it to senior management if not the CEO or owner to say that they were so completely mortified by the state of the middle managers that they were willing to change jobs because of it. Maybe senior management doesn't care, maybe they really, really care. Would be nice to at least give them the chance to know how seriously you were taking it.If you don't, you are empowering a middle manager to hide more or less everything. They can use good staff to cover up their own incompetence. Or worse.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I always get advice from my staff and encourage them to tell me I'm an idiot and explain why. But at the end of the day the buck stops with me. I don't expect them to always agree with me, but I wouldn't be happy if they took that to my boss.
This system only works under a system where you are both ethical and reasonable. In any situation where you are not both, and the problem here could be one or the other or even both (the OP's scenario), this actually becomes a major problem.
At the very least, I hope that upper management would be aware that someone lower down was either blocking or at least presenting some pressure not to expose things to upper management. If the UM is okay with that, great. If not, they need to know, I would think.
-
So with some verbiage I stole from Scott here's my list of primary reasons to not use ESXi. (Ignore the bullets it reads better on my screen)
Citrix XenServer Facts (Advantages really…)
• We already knows it. (It’s already in use for Day-to-Day )
• It is incredibly easy to use.
• It is very performant and this has been shown.
o VM’s used by Interactive over a 3-5 day span producing sellable work only a few days after EagleXen was built and VM’s configured.
• Zero cost for everything, totally zero licensing if Citrix support isn’t required.
o Licensing is per Socket CPU and is perpetual (if needed)
o No critical functionality is lost if support is cancelled
• Full Paravirtualization Options for Linux workloads.
• Updates are also free forever, regardless of a support contract.
o Updating is also extremely easy with Free Tools (already configured)
• No overhead cost for license management.
• No salesman providing guidance. Built to suite our needs
• VM Backups are completely free and schedulable.
o Already configured and performed weekly on hardware we had in house*
• Far greater feature set than any possible VMware option.
o HA is free
o XenMotion is free
o XenMotion Storage is also free*
o Many more free features
• No scale limitations (within reason)
• Local support available (in Rochester)*
o Unlimited free forums support
o Paid options available with licensing through Citrix
• Minimal technical debt incurred.
o Hardware cost for required needsESXi vSphere Essentials Facts
• Publicly and extremely common Hypervisor
o Easily supported between different MSP’s as it’s “common”
o Designed for Enterprise businesses not SMB’s
o Licensing is priced for Enterprises not SMB’s
• Licensing Cost
o Maintenance is required to receive system updates
o Essentials allows use of appropriate hardware only
o Without a Plus plan or higher VMWare offers no support*
Essentials is a bare metal hypervisor that simply allows us to use our chosen hardware
o MSP’s / In-House IT must troubleshoot all issues
• Internal IT must learn ESXi vSphere Essentials management
o Troubleshooting procedures
o Backup systems
o Restoration steps
o Updating steps
• Requires 3rd party VM Backup Solution (Veeam / Unitrends.. etc.) -
@DustinB3403 said:
ESXi vSphere Essentials Facts
• Publicly and extremely common HypervisorThey both are. That's not an advantage to either. Xen is what is used by Amazon, IBM, Rackspace, etc. The "big boys" for the most critical environments in the world. So from that perspective I'd call this a draw at best, in Xen's favour possibly.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
o Easily supported between different MSP’s as it’s “common”
Any reason to believe that XenServer is not easy to get support for or is that just based on people who use ESXi claiming such? I've yet to hear of anyone who struggled to get support for XenServer.
