Get the information to manage your IT infrastructure more effectively. From storage management to virtualization and backups, InfoEdge has the computer hardware technology research you need to navigate today’s hardware challenges.
The Pitfalls of Server Virtualization
For the enterprise looking at a server refresh, the value proposition of virtualization appears straight forward. Virtualization is an ideal server consolidation platform. It allows multiple application and operating system instances to share a single physical server.
An enterprise looking to replace 20 servers can acquire a couple of powerful multiprocessor servers. The new servers can do the work of the 20 old servers by hosting 20 virtual machines (VM). If the cost of one new servers plus virtualization software is less than 20 individual machines, then the virtualized server a good investment.
This reasoning is sound. Info-Tech has found, for example, that a reasonable break even point is hosting three virtual machines on one powerful multi-processor server.
The problem is that for best implementation a single multiprocessor server with internal direct attached storage is often not enough. Consider the following:
- Vendor claims about the capabilities of servers to host multiple applications are often
exaggerated. For example, a claim of 12 VMs per processor more realistically should be taken to
mean 6 VMs per processor.
- Different VMs will have different requirements in terms of processors, memory, and network I/O. Each VM also requires a certain amount of processing overhead from the virtualization server. Further, when multiple VMs are combined on a server the total requirements can sometimes be greater than the sum of each individual VM’s requirements.
- Even if all the proposed VMs can be accommodated on a single stand-alone box, and there is no need to scale the infrastructure for future VMs (highly unlikely) migrating to the single server is akin to putting 20 precious eggs in one basket. The server becomes a single point of failure, the server crashes and 20 individual virtual servers go "poof"!
Learn more about server consolidation and virtualization in All About Implementing Virtualization (IN-6485)
Getting Value from a LAN Refresh
Some IT departments have pre-defined refresh cycles that apply to LAN infrastructure. This could be due
to leasing agreements, a desire to maintain a leading edge network, or a pre-determined policy that has
not been reviewed recently. There is nothing wrong with a regular refresh cycle on LAN infrastructure for
some businesses; for instance, if the LAN is considered particularly mission-critical, or if a company finds
itself on the leading edge of technology adoption. In most cases organizations can get more life - and
more value out of the LAN, particularly if the current refresh cycle is 3 years or less.
If a regular LAN refresh cycle is adopted, the target window should be at least 4 years. On one hand, it is
not desirable to keep the LAN in service so long that it is no longer reliable, but on the other hand it is not
fiscally prudent to retire equipment that is perfectly functional and sufficiently supporting the business.
For example, consider that Company A has a regular three year LAN refresh cycle, while Company B
upgrades the LAN on an ad-hoc basis based on requirements. Assume that in a 10 year period
Company A goes through three LAN refreshes, while Company B only refreshes twice. All other things
being equal, Company A will have spent 50% more on LAN refreshes over ten years than Company B. In
dollar terms, if the cost of a LAN refresh is $250,000 for each company, Company A will have spent a
quarter of a million dollars more on LAN infrastructure than Company B in the ten year period.
Learn more about LAN refresh in
All About LAN Refresh Bundle (IN-6488)
Selecting a Desktop Management Solution
Changing technology and business requirements and an increase in mergers and acquisitions have left IT managers with
the unenviable task of monitoring ever-changing IT assets and environments. This encompasses the management of
desktops, operating systems and applications. IT operations are costly, and the day to day management of users and their
desktop environments adds significantly to those costs. Desktop management solutions will benefit a wide range of
organizations and the demand for these solutions will expand. The following is a summary of the key trends that
Datamonitor sees influencing the market over the next two years:
- The overlap between desktop management and IT systems management will increase - There is a great
degree of overlap between desktop management and IT systems management. Datamonitor sees this overlap
increasing until desktop management solutions becoming a subset of the IT systems management market. The
convergence between the two markets will be prompted by end users’ desire for simplifying technology
procurement and deployment. End users are increasingly wary of fragmented IT implementations and will favor
manageability and simplicity over competitive price or technology leadership.
- As the two markets draw closer many desktop management vendors will expand - Vendors who have
traditionally focused on desktop management will expand their offerings to include greater systems management
functionality. Avocent is clearly taking this path with its LANDesk products and Altiris was en route to becoming a
fully-fledged IT systems management vendor before it was acquired by Symantec. The addition of Altiris’s
technology to Symantec’s portfolio (which already includes Veritas) may allow it to become a strong contender in
the systems management space over the next two years.
Learn more about desktop management software in Decision Matrix: Selecting a Desktop Management Vendor (DM-2104)
|
Cart