Guide to storage virtualisation
By Scott Lowe, TechRepublic
October 13, 2006
URL: http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/hardware/soa/Guide-to-storage-virtualisation/0,139023759,339271528,00.htm
When it comes to server consolidation or building a development environment, virtualisation is at the forefront of making these efforts successful. A sound enterprise-grade virtualisation strategy includes careful planning. This includes appropriate selection of the components that will make up the virtualisation infrastructure beyond the host servers. A critical component to your strategy must include appropriate shared storage in order to take advantage of the high-end features of virtualisation software.
The type of storage you choose for virtualisation is dependent
on your specific needs, as well as on the type of virtualisation you choose to
use. For the purposes of this article, I'll be focusing on only two main types
of virtualisation: host-based -- running your virtual machines under software that
is installed on top of a host operating system, such as VMware Server or Virtual
Server 2005; the second type is bare metal -- running VMware ESX Server, for
example.
With both types of virtualisation, you can choose either
host-based or shared storage, but you should be aware of some of the
limitations imposed if you decide to stick with host-based storage rather than
a SAN or supported NAS device. The host-based virtualisation software is not
SAN-aware, but you can still run your virtual machines from a SAN or fast NAS
unit by using the underlying operating system's SAN connectivity. You won't get
the full benefits that you would get from running your virtual machines from a
SAN, using bare-metal virtualisation, but it remains an option to consider.
I'll go into more detail on each of these setups below.
Host-based virtualisation and host-based storage (host/host)
This scenario is the simplest to grasp and the easiest to
implement. Here, everything is local -- the virtualisation software, the virtual
machines, and the storage. Further, since the virtualisation software runs on
either Linux or Windows, you're probably already familiar with managing the
environment. However, in this scenario, your virtual machines are afforded very
little real-time protection.
If your host server dies, all of the virtual machines
will go with it. Sure, you can back up the virtual machine files and restore
them in the event of a failure, but the process will be somewhat time consuming
and, depending on how you handle the backup, you may lose some data.
Host-based virtualisation and shared storage (host/shared)
If you have a SAN or a supported NAS device, and you want
host-based virtualisation (due to cost, perhaps), this is your best option. In
this scenario, the virtual machines still run on top of the host operating
system, but you can store the virtual machine configuration and data files on
the SAN. While the virtualisation software itself is not SAN-aware, you can
still take advantage of the capabilities offered by your SAN to keep your environment
more highly available. For example, using this method allows you to make use of
your SAN's snapshot capability meaning that, if a virtual machine is corrupted,
you can easily recover. Further, if your virtual host server dies, you can
fairly quickly mount the SAN volume on a different server and bring the virtual
machines back up.
Beware the storage virtualisation quick fix
One of the really hot areas of development in the storage world is virtualisation. One storage expert has clear ideas on the future, and in particular what he sees as a key mistake many companies are making with virtualisation. The lesson? Avoid the siren call of a low cost, easier-to-implement in-band virtualisation solution.
Read on
Virtualisation 101
Systems programming has a new, hip word -- virtualisation. It has captured the hearts of IT professionals in small and large companies with its promise of freedom from the tyranny of hardware. We look at the different forms of virtualisation.
Read on
Case study: City of Fontana
In early 2003, IT staff at the City of Fontana, California began seeking a centralised storage solution with virtualisation capabilities to standardise and support a new enterprise resource planning system. Goals for the solution: improved storage utilisation, reduced management complexity, and support for future growth.
Download
Case study: Lufthansa Systems
Lufthansa Systems has been planning and operating its data storage on a strategic basis with one of the most modern computer systems in Europe for years. By the end of 1999, the IT managers at Lufthansa Systems were certain that changing the storage system was the only possible and economically efficient way to manage its continuous and long-term data growth.
Download
Case study: Cuisines Schmidt
Cuisines Schmidt is the French leader in the manufacture of fitted kitchens and bathrooms. The existing Storage Area Network -- supplied by a leading storage vendor -- was at full capacity, did not allow systems to be restored quickly enough, and was not effectively disaster-proofed. Find out what the company did to overcome its problems.
Download
Bare metal virtualisation and host-based storage (metal/host)
Personally, I think this scenario is the hardest to manage. In
this case, you're running VMware ESX server on the bare metal and storing the
individual virtual machines on local disks. You have the same risks and
recovery limitations inherent in the host/host model, but you do not get the
benefit of backing up the individual virtual machine files without using third-party
software.
Your best option for this scenario is to individually back up each
virtual machine as if it were a physical server. That is, use NTbackup, or
install your backup software's agent.
Bare metal virtualisation and shared storage (metal/shared)
This is, by far, the most desirable -- and the most expensive -- way
to implement a robust virtualised environment in your organisation. In this
scenario, you get all of the great benefits of the host/shared method (snapshot
capability, etc), but, with VMware ESX, you also get incredible features
including VMotion, VMware HA (High Availability), and VMware DRS (Distributed
Resource Scheduler).
VMotion allows you to seamlessly move a running virtual
machine between ESX hosts. HA watches your ESX hosts and, upon detection of a
host failure, automatically moves guests from the failed host to other servers
in the cluster. DRS automatically moves virtual machines between suitable ESX
hosts based on the resource requirements of the virtual machine. DRS also
provides a "maintenance mode" option whereby, with minimal effort,
you can force DRS to move all guests from a host node so you can perform
maintenance on that node.
All of the features require shared storage in the form of a
supported Fibre Channel or iSCSI SAN or NAS device.
Summary
A robust, scalable, highly available virtualised environment
can save an organisation significant time and money, but you need to carefully
plan your virtualisation storage strategy and decide which approach is best for
your company.
|
|
Host-based
virtualisation
|
Bare metal
virtualisation
|
|
Host-based
storage
|
Host/Host
|
Metal/Host
|
|
|
Pro: Cheap (the
virtualisation software is free).
|
Pro: The local storage
is cheap.
|
|
|
Pro: The local storage
is cheap.
|
Con: The virtualisation
software is expensive.
|
|
|
Pro: Easy to deploy.
|
Con: Without 3rd party
tools, limited to traditional backup methods.
|
|
|
Con: "Eggs in one basket" -- lots of VMs on a single host.
|
Con: "Eggs in one
basket" -- lots of VMs on a single host.
|
|
|
Neutral: Can back up
whole VM with regular file backup tools or use an agent in each VM.
|
|
|
|
Con: Underlying OS
overhead.
|
Pro: Little underlying
OS overhead.
|
|
|
Best bet for "proof of
concept" virtualisation projects.
|
Best bet for small
virtualisation projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shared storage
|
Host/Shared
|
Metal/Shared
|
|
|
Pro: Virtualisation software is free.
|
Pro: Extremely robust.
|
|
|
Con: Storage is fairly to very expensive.
|
Con: Most expensive option: Storage is fairly to very
expensive. The virtualisation software is expensive.
|
|
|
Pro: Recovery is a manual process but can be done
fairly easily when configured right.
|
Pro: Highly available. Load balancing (DRS).
|
|
|
Con: Underlying OS overhead.
|
Pro: Little underlying OS overhead.
|
|
|
Best bet for virtualisation projects for which
software costs must be kept to a minimum and enterprise-grade recovery is not
necessary.
|
Best bet for enterprise-grade virtualisation projects
where availability is key.
|
TechRepublic is the online community and information resource for all IT professionals, from support staff to executives. We offer in-depth technical articles written for IT professionals by IT professionals. In addition to articles on everything from Windows to e-mail to firewalls, we offer IT industry analysis, downloads, management tips, discussion forums, and e-newsletters.
©2006 TechRepublic, Inc.
Copyright © 2009 CBS Interactive, a CBS Company. All Rights Reserved.
ZDNET is a registered service mark of CBS Interactive. ZDNET Logo is a service mark of CBS Interactive.
|