Comments on: Does virtualization makes monitoring obsolete? http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/ Innovative Technology presented by Innovative People Fri, 03 Feb 2012 20:57:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Stefan http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/comment-page-1/#comment-3380 Stefan Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:58:38 +0000 http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/#comment-3380 The PC Blade Daily, a forum for news and discussion about centralized computing has quoted me on the impact of virtualization on monitoring. Read more at the PC Blade Daily. http://www.pcbladecomputing.com/monitoring-virtualized-solutions/#more-147 Regards, Stefan Stranger http://weblog.stranger.nl The PC Blade Daily, a forum for news and discussion about centralized computing has quoted me on the impact of virtualization on monitoring.

Read more at the PC Blade Daily. http://www.pcbladecomputing.com/monitoring-virtualized-solutions/#more-147

Regards,
Stefan Stranger
http://weblog.stranger.nl

]]> By: Stefan Stranger http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/comment-page-1/#comment-3099 Stefan Stranger Thu, 01 Mar 2007 10:26:55 +0000 http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/#comment-3099 Hi Paul, I agree consolidation is still important, but you don't need virtualization for consolidation. It helps but without virtualization you can still use consolidation to lower the number of OS'es. But the point I wanted to make that it's that easy to deploy (virtual) machines that you would probably create more machines compared to deploying physical machines. When planning virtualization, you should also look at the possibilities for consolidation. It may be the most important reason for virtualization. In the past many applications had their own os, and that's why there is much underutilized hardware. With tools like Vmware’s Capacity Planner and Microsoft’s System Center Virtual Machine Manager the best candidates for virtualization and consolidation are shown. Both do more than that, just look at http://www.microsoft.com/systemcenter/scvmm/default.mspx and http://www.vmware.com/company/news/releases/vac_services.html. Do you think that the management costs will decrease with the implementation of virtualization? Because I think the costs will increase, because you would also need to manage the new virtual layer and you still would need to manage the virtual machines, just as with physical machines. Ok with consolidation hardware cost can be lower but at the management costs will not decrease dramatically. Due to fast server provisioning also some costs can be saved. I think it’s difficult to have clear figures about how much money spent on management can be saved by implementing virtualization. And if I look at SMS I would think the patch management process will change. How? Maybe you can patch OS’s by mounting the offline Microsoft’s VHD’s and VMware’s virtual disk and do a file replace for implementing the patches. Who knows? Regards, Stefan Stranger http://weblog.stranger.nl Hi Paul,

I agree consolidation is still important, but you don’t need virtualization for consolidation. It helps but without virtualization you can still use consolidation to lower the number of OS’es. But the point I wanted to make that it’s that easy to deploy (virtual) machines that you would probably create more machines compared to deploying physical machines.

When planning virtualization, you should also look at the possibilities for consolidation. It may be the most important reason for virtualization. In the past many applications had their own os, and that’s why there is much underutilized hardware. With tools like Vmware’s Capacity Planner and Microsoft’s System Center Virtual Machine Manager the best candidates for virtualization and consolidation are shown. Both do more than that, just look at http://www.microsoft.com/systemcenter/scvmm/default.mspx and http://www.vmware.com/company/news/releases/vac_services.html.

Do you think that the management costs will decrease with the implementation of virtualization? Because I think the costs will increase, because you would also need to manage the new virtual layer and you still would need to manage the virtual machines, just as with physical machines. Ok with consolidation hardware cost can be lower but at the management costs will not decrease dramatically. Due to fast server provisioning also some costs can be saved. I think it’s difficult to have clear figures about how much money spent on management can be saved by implementing virtualization.

And if I look at SMS I would think the patch management process will change. How? Maybe you can patch OS’s by mounting the offline Microsoft’s VHD’s and VMware’s virtual disk and do a file replace for implementing the patches. Who knows?

Regards,
Stefan Stranger
http://weblog.stranger.nl

]]> By: Paul http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/comment-page-1/#comment-2988 Paul Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:09:54 +0000 http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/#comment-2988 Interesting... I agree that monitoring stays important. I disagree toward the comment that the amount of OS's will rise. Virtualization does make deployment easier, but this does not mean that consolidation on a platform isn't important anymore. Otherwise the managament costs will increase more than virtualization offers in return of flexibility. Also: does application virtualization makes SMS (SCCM) obsolete? Since 99% of the apps are no longer controlled by SMS but Softgrid, patches distributed by WSUS and OS by Windows Deployment (RIS). ALso AV have their own distribution mechanisms and their is still a lot of good old kix and AD GPO deployment for drivers and a few other non-virtualized apps. -Paul Interesting… I agree that monitoring stays important.
I disagree toward the comment that the amount of OS’s will rise. Virtualization does make deployment easier, but this does not mean that consolidation on a platform isn’t important anymore. Otherwise the managament costs will increase more than virtualization offers in return of flexibility.

Also: does application virtualization makes SMS (SCCM) obsolete? Since 99% of the apps are no longer controlled by SMS but Softgrid, patches distributed by WSUS and OS by Windows Deployment (RIS). ALso AV have their own distribution mechanisms and their is still a lot of good old kix and AD GPO deployment for drivers and a few other non-virtualized apps.

-Paul

]]> By: Stefan Stranger http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/comment-page-1/#comment-2987 Stefan Stranger Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:01:33 +0000 http://www.buit.org/2007/02/26/does-virtualization-makes-monitoring-obsolete/#comment-2987 VMware attacks Microsoft licence changes. Source: http://blogs.vmware.com/vmtn/ According to VMware: Microsoft is trying to restrict customers’ flexibility and freedom to choose virtualization software by limiting who can run their software and how they can run it. Microsoft is leveraging its ownership of the market leading operating system and numerous applications that are market leaders in their respective categories (Exchange, SQL Server, Active Directory) to drive customers to use Microsoft virtualization products. Their tactics are focused on software licensing and distribution terms (for SQL Server, Exchange, Windows Server, Vista) and through the APIs and formats for virtualized Windows. In particular, Microsoft does not have key virtual infrastructure capabilities (like VMotion), and they are making those either illegal or expensive for customers; Microsoft doesn't have virtual desktop offerings, so they are denying it to customers; and Microsoft is moving to control this new layer that sits on the hardware by forcing their specifications and APIs on the industry. Included below in this document are explanations with supporting details of some of these specific areas. Virtualization opens up new enabling models for IT customers and technology vendors. To fully achieve this vision, the industry must ensure fundamental market choice and ecosystem interoperability. Microsoft operating systems and applications are both market dominant and they deliver value to customers. However, customers and vendors require freedom of choice to implement and deliver applications and operating systems from any vendor with any chosen virtual hardware platform. Microsoft is not acting in customers’ best interests when they attempt to force an integrated virtual hardware/operating system/application stack for their operating system and applications. Customers require an “any to any� interoperability model where Microsoft application stacks can run freely with licensing, open APIs, and support equivalence on non-Microsoft virtual hardware to Microsoft’s own virtualization technologies Follow the story at Google news. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1113669668 Regards, VMware attacks Microsoft licence changes.

Source: http://blogs.vmware.com/vmtn/

According to VMware:
Microsoft is trying to restrict customers’ flexibility and freedom to choose virtualization software by limiting who can run their software and how they can run it. Microsoft is leveraging its ownership of the market leading operating system and numerous applications that are market leaders in their respective categories (Exchange, SQL Server, Active Directory) to drive customers to use Microsoft virtualization products. Their tactics are focused on software licensing and distribution terms (for SQL Server, Exchange, Windows Server, Vista) and through the APIs and formats for virtualized Windows.

In particular, Microsoft does not have key virtual infrastructure capabilities (like VMotion), and they are making those either illegal or expensive for customers; Microsoft doesn’t have virtual desktop offerings, so they are denying it to customers; and Microsoft is moving to control this new layer that sits on the hardware by forcing their specifications and APIs on the industry. Included below in this document are explanations with supporting details of some of these specific areas.

Virtualization opens up new enabling models for IT customers and technology vendors. To fully achieve this vision, the industry must ensure fundamental market choice and ecosystem interoperability. Microsoft operating systems and applications are both market dominant and they deliver value to customers. However, customers and vendors require freedom of choice to implement and deliver applications and operating systems from any vendor with any chosen virtual hardware platform. Microsoft is not acting in customers’ best interests when they attempt to force an integrated virtual hardware/operating system/application stack for their operating system and applications. Customers require an “any to any� interoperability model where Microsoft application stacks can run freely with licensing, open APIs, and support equivalence on non-Microsoft virtual hardware to Microsoft’s own virtualization technologies

Follow the story at Google news. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1113669668

Regards,

]]>