George Crump

by

Hyperconverged Infrastructures (HCI) were supposed to ease IT professionals’ management burdens, but flaws in their design explain why HCI doesn’t simplify IT. These flaws have led HCI, which should be the one infrastructure for the enterprise, to be a niche solution for corner use cases within the data center. Instead of simplifying through convergence, HCI solutions from companies like VMware and Nutanix exacerbate complexity.

The HCI Flaws

  1. HCI Isn’t Scalable
  2. HCI Isn’t Flexible
  3. HCI Isn’t Secure

Because of these three flaws, complex and expensive three-tier architectures with dedicated storage arrays, restrictive compute tiers, and proprietary network switches continue to flourish despite their own challenges. Can HCI be fixed so it can finally deliver its full promise?

HCI Isn’t Scalable

How can an architecture like HCI that is scale out by design, not scale? It’s true, though; HCI can’t scale large, and it can’t scale small. Most HCI vendors force you to start with three nodes, making HCI impractical for Edge and small offices. The inability to scale small and scale large is one reason why HCI doesn’t simplify IT.

Lack of a unified code base is one reason Why HCI doesn't simplify IT
HCI Doesn’t Converge, It Squeezes

At the same time, most HCI solutions can’t scale beyond eight or so nodes without serious performance concerns. These performance concerns stem from the fact that HCI solutions don’t actually converge the three data center tiers (networking, computing, and storage). They are three separate software packages, often from three separate vendors. HCI squeezes the three separate software-based tiers onto a single server. Each of these tiers has different lanes of communication between the servers. As a result, internode communication is exponentially increased by a factor of three.

UCI Solves the HCI Scale Issue

Ultraconverged Infrastructure (UCI) solutions, like VergeOS, solve both aspects of the scale issue. It can scale small, and it can scale large. Instead of using a separate application for networking, another for compute, and still another for storage, UCI is a single piece of very efficient code.

Lack of a unified code base is one reason HCI doesn't simplify IT. UCI has a Unified Code Base
UCI Converges Networking, Compute, and Storage Into a Single Code Base

Thanks to UCI’s unification of the legacy IT stack into a single piece of software, there is only a need for a single lane of communication between nodes. The reduction in east-west traffic enables scaling beyond 200 nodes without significant network overhead. At the same time, the efficiency of the code base enables a two-node UCI environment to deliver the performance and cost-effectiveness that Edge and remote locations need. The common code base also means a unified GUI for simple administration and day-to-day operations. UCI simplifies IT by providing a single software package. It can support small offices and Edge locations while scaling to meet the needs of the primary data center.

HCI Isn’t Flexible

Another reason why HCI doesn’t simplify IT is that it restricts the type of nodes users can add to the cluster. The idea behind HCI is that as you add additional servers to the environment, you automatically scale each of the three data center tiers to support new applications or additional users. The reality is that most organizations don’t need or want to scale all three of these tiers simultaneously; sometimes, you only need additional computing power, and other times, you only need additional storage capacity.

While some HCI solutions can now add “storage-only” nodes, they compromise performance and place restrictions on data protection and efficiency. Practically speaking, most HCI solutions must use nearly identical nodes as they scale, or create an entirely separate instance with an entirely different node configuration. Each additional HCI instance further adds to data center fragmentation instead of converging it.

In some cases, vendors require customers to replace servers, even if they are only a few years old, to support the latest version of their software. This requirement is not optional with them; upgrading to the new hardware means replacing older hardware.

UCI Solves the Flexibility Issue

UCI simplifies IT by solving the flexibility issue. It allows a mixture of different nodes within the same instance. Within the instance, VergeOS can group like nodes together. Then IT can allocate some or all those resources to specific workloads. This flexible intelligence also means that customers don’t have to upgrade or replace hardware to run the latest version of the HCI software.

The efficiency of VergeOS enables customers to extract more serviceable life from aging servers while fully exploiting the capabilities of modern servers that are only a few months old. Servers within a single VergeOS instance can be from different decades, processor manufacturers, and storage types.

Lack of a flexible scale is another reason why HCI doesn't simplify IT. UCI delivers complete flexibility.

Nodes can also have different areas of focus. Some can be heavily weighted for computing power while using the storage from other nodes in the instance, and others can be heavily weighted for storage capacity or performance and provide that storage or performance to the rest of the instance.

HCI Isn’t Secure

The lack of a robust security strategy is another reason why HCI doesn’t simplify IT. Customers must fill data protection and ransomware resiliency gaps by using third-party applications and creating additional infrastructures. As a result, legacy HCI forces IT planners to look at threats like ransomware as a backup and recovery problem instead of as an infrastructure problem, which is what it really is.

After IT discovers a ransomware attack, the malware file must be found, stopped, and removed. Then, IT must methodically recover data. By only looking at ransomware as a data protection problem, the average downtime associated with a ransomware attack is typically measured in days and sometimes weeks.

UCI is Hardened and Secure

UCI simplifies IT by providing infrastructure-wide data protection and resiliency capabilities. First, VergeIO’s Virtual Data Centers (VDC), which encapsulate the entire data center, also shrink the attack surface available to ransomware. It is nearly impossible for a malware file infecting one VDC to cross over to another VDC.

Second, VergeOS’ snapshot capabilities are powered by IOclone, which provides independent, immutable copies. However, because VergeOS implements global inline deduplication at its core, clone/snapshot copies are also space efficient. Taking frequent immutable snapshots without impacting performance provides the second layer of defense against ransomware.

Third, VergeOS’ IOfortify provides early detection of a ransomware attack. With it, your notification comes minutes after an attack starts instead of coming from confused users hours later. This early detection, combined with frequent, immutable clones, means recovery occurs within minutes and with little to no data loss.

Finally, VergeOS operates as read-only firmware at its core and injects a copy of itself into each VDC. As a result, if a cyber-attack could ever get to the actual VergeOS operating environment, a known good copy at the core is available to replace it.

The Impact of HCI Complexity

The impact of HCI complexity and its limitations means that IT must use the legacy three-tier architecture. It is also why most IT professionals don’t think HCI can replace a SAN, even though it should be a better option for virtualized environments. While legacy three-tier architectures are more complicated and more expensive, they, through brute force, work through some of the issues mentioned above.

UCI fulfills and extends the potential of legacy HCI. Using a single code base allows IT to manage all aspects of infrastructure in a cohesive, straightforward manner. UCI has flexible scalability, extending to both large and small needs. UCI can mix nodes of different types, which enables true and long-lasting actual convergence. UCI’s integrated data protection capabilities eliminate the dependency on a separate data protection infrastructure. As a result, UCI delivers more widespread convergence than HCI, while delivering infrastructure-wide data resiliency.

To learn more about UCI and VergeIO, register to watch the VergeOS Architecture Deep Dive with our CTO and founder, Greg Campbell. You can also sign up for a virtual test drive and start running VergeOS in minutes.

Filed Under: HCI Tagged With: ,

by

A Customer’s Journey: VMware, Cloud or VergeOS

Listen Live to learn why SkiBig3 Chose VergeOS over VMware and The Cloud

Join VergeIO and SkiBig3 live for an in-depth look at how one of the largest Ski Resorts in Canada is using VergeOS to reduce hardware acquisition costs, improve data resiliency, and simplify IT operations.

As part of their infrastructure planning the IT leaders at SkiBig3, Mitch Matula and Chris Lamothe, reviewed the following:

  • Hyper-V
  • VMware
  • The Public Cloud

Listen live to learn why they ultimately chose VergeOS, and if you’re considering any of those options, why you too should consider VergeOS. Get your questions answered by a team of IT professionals who use VergeOS everyday.

About SkiBig3

SkiBig3 works for three ski resorts in Banff National Park; Banff Sunshine, the Lake Louise Ski Resort, and Mt. Norquay. SkiBig3 is dedicated to showcasing everything these winter destinations have to offer.

Our Speakers

Chris Lamothe, Systems Director, SkiBig3

Mitch Matula, IT Manager, SkiBig3

George Crump, CMO, VergeIO

Filed Under: Past Webinar, Webinar

by

IT has to factor the cost of the VMware Tax into its infrastructure planning. Where does this tax come from? It is the extra expense in hardware needed, to compensate for the overhead of VMware’s inefficient virtualization code. Adding additional components like vSAN for storage, or NSX for networking only makes the tax more severe. These components will adversely impact applications and users if IT doesn’t work around the overhead. These workarounds cost money, increase complexity and create a more brittle infrastructure that struggles to adapt to the organization’s future needs.

There are three primary effects of the VMware Tax:

  • A lower-than-possible VM Density.
  • The continued need for stand-alone bare-metal workloads.
  • A proliferation of the three-tier architecture.

To compensate, organizations are forced to:

  • Buy more or more powerful physical servers than what should be necessary.
  • Buy high-performance dedicated all-flash arrays.
  • Face a never-ending future of premature server and storage refreshes.

The Cost of the VMware Tax is one of the hidden costs of VMware. Learn about the rest of them in our on-demand webinar, “The 4 Hidden Costs of VMware.”

The Cost of VMware Tax on Server Planning

The first cost of the VMware Tax is that meeting the organization’s demands requires using either fewer virtual machines (VMs) per server and more physical servers or more powerful physical servers to support more VMs per server. As we discuss in our article, “HCI isn’t Infrastructure,” using more servers highlights the scaling issues common in Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) and leads most customers to purchase more powerful servers to reduce cluster node count.

Using more powerful servers with more CPUs, cores, and RAM increases those servers’ costs. This approach also increases VMware licensing costs since the company charges by the physical CPU installed in its nodes, and the expectation is that after the Broadcom acquisition is complete, the company will switch to a per-core licensing strategy and is expected to raise costs even further.

Overcoming the VMware Tax with Powerful Servers

Overcoming the cost of the VMware Tax by using more powerful servers exposes the lack of flexibility when scaling, the typical VMware architecture has. More powerful servers will likely be used longer before organizational growth requires IT to add another server to the cluster. When it comes time to add additional servers to the cluster, two or three years later, that exact server type may no longer be available, or a better option may be available using a different CPU vendor. Managing nodes of different types within a VMware environment is convoluted, leading many customers to establish an entirely separate cluster, further increasing costs and complexity.

There is also the challenge of, after three or four years, the hypervisor or storage vendor may upgrade its software to the point that it no longer supports the original servers. At that point, IT is faced with refreshing its entire server infrastructure to maintain compatibility with the updated software.

The Cost of the VMware Tax on Scale

Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) solutions expect a “balanced scale,” where the organization adds equal amounts of computing, storage, and networking. This requirement exposes another cost of the VMware Tax. No organization always needs to scale these three components at the same time. Especially when purchasing more powerful servers, the organization will likely need more storage performance or capacity before requiring additional computing resources.

Again, legacy HCI designs like those from VMware (vSAN, vSphere, NSX) or Nutanix expect almost identical nodes to be added to the cluster. To meet capacity demand, customers are adding servers similar to their original installation, and they end up paying for and wasting a massive amount of CPU and memory that come with those servers. Although a few vendors have evolved to allow more storage-centric nodes, these are complex band-aids with many compromises and increasing complexity. Most customers choose not to use them.

The enforcement of balanced scaling forces most customers considering HCI solutions to disqualify them later. As a result, the VMware Tax indirectly proliferates the more complex and expensive three-tier architecture.

VergeOS Enables High VM Density and Imbalanced Scale

VergeOS is a highly efficient data center operating system (DCOS) that enables high per-physical server VM populations. It does this by integrating the three standard data center tiers (networking, computing, and storage) into a single code base that is a fraction of the size in terms of lines of code without sacrificing features. This effort is the foundation of Ultraconverged Infrastructure (UCI) which moves beyond the flawed HCI model to deliver the full promise of a truly converged infrastructure.

A more compact code base means faster execution on the same hardware. Integrating the traditional data center tiers means that efficiency carries throughout the entire solution. Our typical customer can support 25 to 30% more VMs per physical server with VergeOS than their prior solution (Hyper-V, VMware, Nutanix) while running on the very same, existing hardware.

The lack of flexible scale increases The Cost of the VMware Tax

As the organization’s demands grow, VergeOS provides flexible and intelligent scaling. An optimized internal-node communication protocol ensures near-linear performance increments as IT adds nodes to the environment. VergeOS’ flexibility means that IT can add nodes of almost any type, including storage or compute-centric nodes. VergeIO has never forced the retirement of old servers to support a new version of VergeOS.

VMware Tax Encourages Bare Metal

Despite all the advantages and flexibility of virtualization, the cost of the VMware Tax means that many customers still view some applications as bare-metal only. The performance demands of these servers are just too strenuous for the virtual environment. They either starve other VMs on the same node of resources or can’t continually guarantee access to the performance these applications demand. They also tend to be certain hardware types, like GPUs, that specific applications need, which legacy solutions don’t adequately virtualize.

The result is IT must purchase and stand up dedicated silos of computing and storage for these applications, which increases costs and complexity. Additionally, these bare-metal environments don’t benefit from core virtualization capabilities like seamless VM migration.

VergeOS Delivers Near Bare Metal Performance

VergeOS’ compute efficiency also helps formerly bare-metal-only workloads to be able to realize the benefits of virtualization. Historically, many bare-metal workloads remained bare-metal because of the storage I/O demands. VergeOS integration of storage, coupled with the performance of its file system, delivers near-bare-metal performance for these workloads. The VergeOS storage component, VergeFS, ensures all reads are local to the virtual machine. Finally, VergeOS supports nodes of various CPU classes within the same instance. Our customers can and do mix Intel, AMD, and GPU-based nodes, even of different generations. They repeatedly tell us that they were able to virtualize formerly bare-metal workloads without any degradation of performance.

Conclusion

With its inefficiencies and subsequent costs, the VMware Tax represents a significant concern for IT infrastructure planning. Its impact on VM density and the push toward bare-metal workloads signifies the increased expenses and complexities organizations face. As the technology landscape continues evolving, solutions like VergeOS emerge as viable alternatives, offering enhanced VM densities and near bare-metal performance.

VMware VM to VergeOS Chalktalk

By merging the conventional data center tiers and focusing on efficient operation, VergeOS addresses the challenges posed by VMware’s model and presents a forward-thinking solution that adapts to an organization’s dynamic needs. As organizations strive for agility, cost-effectiveness, and scalability, transitioning to platforms prioritizing these attributes will be paramount. VergeOS makes that transition seamless thanks to our IOmigrate capability.

Filed Under: VMwareExit Tagged With: ,

by

HCI isn't an Infrastructure

As IT leaders consider the practicality of a VMware exit, they will also consider hyperconverged infrastructure. However, the inability to scale flexibly means that HCI isn’t an infrastructure they can use as a replacement platform. Even the few HCI solutions that are not dependent on VMware as their hypervisor suffer the problem of brittle scalability.

The Three Requirements of Flexible Infrastructure

A flexible infrastructure must meet these three requirements:

  1. The ability to scale small, less than three nodes for Edge, Remote Office, and small business data centers.
  2. The ability to scale large, dozens to hundreds of nodes, to meet the demands of an enterprise data center.
  3. The ability to manage nodes of different types, CPU brands, compute-only, and storage-only, so that it can adapt to the ever-changing needs of the data center.

The inability to meet these requirements with a single solution means that if an organization selects HCI as its infrastructure strategy, it likely will either need multiple HCI solutions to cover the organization’s needs, or at least multiple instances of the same HCI solution. Ironically, Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) isn’t an infrastructure, nor does it converge.

UCI is Infrastructure

Because of its inflexibility, a counter to HCI, which is relegated to niche use cases, is Ultraconverged Infrastructure (UCI). UCI is an infrastructure, Data Center Operating System (DCOS), and does truly provide convergence. VergeOS is a UCI solution that can scale small, large, and is flexible which allows it to adapt to the changing needs of organizations. Additionally, it is not dependent on VMware, which makes it an ideal alternative for customers looking for a VMware exit.

Infrastructure Must Scale Small

Not every business is an enterprise, but most need compute capabilities beyond what cloud-based SaaS applications can provide. As those businesses scale, the cost of the cloud becomes a significant factor. The point of entry for most HCI solutions is a three-server configuration which becomes nodes in its cluster. This requirement is often too large for Edge, Remote Office, and Small Data Center use cases.

As a result of the inability to scale small, most IT planners rule out HCI for these use cases and compromise with standalone servers and an inexpensive shared storage solution. The compromise increases the cost of acquiring the hardware and software for Edge, Remote Office, and Small Data Center use cases, and it increases complexity in an area that must have simplicity. These use cases have limited or no IT administrators, especially at the Edge.

UCI Scales Small

Users can start with as few as two nodes, and because of VergeOS’ efficiency, those nodes can be very cost-effective mini-servers, ideal for the Edge or Remote Office use cases. Even small data centers can run comfortably on two or three low-end to mid-range servers, reducing hardware acquisition costs by 50% or more. Learn more about the advantages of using UCI in small data centers here.

VergeOS’ efficiency comes from its tight integration of the network, compute, and storage tiers into a single, cohesive data center operating system (DCOS). The actual convergence of those tiers, instead of HCI’s approach of an “elegant bundle,” means the elimination of redundant metadata tables, databases, APIs, and management tools. The result is that the underlying hardware is unchained and enabled to reach its full potential.

Infrastructures Must Scale Large

Small businesses grow to medium-sized businesses and then eventually to large businesses. Starting over with a new infrastructure as the business grows is costly and risky.

Again, most HCI solutions start too big to be viable for small data centers or Edge, but the few that focus on the smaller end of the market often can’t scale large enough to meet the organization’s demands as it grows. They often can’t scale past six to eight nodes. The result is IT must replace the “starter-HCI” solution with another more scalable solution. The replacement often includes replacing hardware since each HCI solution seems to have a unique hardware compatibility list or comes “bundled” with hardware.

Even so-called enterprise HCI solutions have limitations and can scale to only a few dozen nodes, which is not large enough to provide complete infrastructure consolidation. There is also a practical limit to how large HCI solutions can scale. Most vendors use standard IO protocols to communicate between nodes, which means that every node must be “touched” every time a packet is received by the cluster, creating an untenable amount of internode, or east-west traffic.

Yet another part of the challenge is that most HCI solutions don’t include complete layer 2 and layer 3 networking functionality in their product. At most, they provide virtual switching or they bundle in, yet again, another third-party software-defined networking product. The lack of native networking functionality means that HCI clusters can’t practically scale to more than a dozen nodes without suffering a performance impact.

These challenges are why the legacy three-tier architecture continues to be the bread-and-butter infrastructure for enterprises. It is also why most IT leaders believe that HCI cannot replace standalone networking, virtualization, and storage.

HCI isn't an Infrastructure

UCI Scales Large

VergeOS can not only start as small as two nodes, but it can grow to well over one hundred nodes. Organizations of any size can start using VergeOS with confidence that it can grow or shrink, to meet their needs. The team at VergeIO also developed a proprietary networking protocol that optimizes internode communication, significantly reducing east-west traffic and making scale technically possible and practical.

Infrastructure Must Scale Flexibly

Infrastructure flexibility is a critical requirement because small and large businesses evolve. Their IT needs are not static, and neither should their infrastructure be. It needs to adapt to innovations in hardware and business needs.

Most HCI solutions are rigid in their configuration, only supporting specific hardware and forcing customers to upgrade to new hardware as the infrastructure software is updated. In HCI terms, scaling up typically means adding identical nodes, making it difficult to take advantage of the latest hardware advancements or adopt new types of nodes, such as storage-only or compute-only. HCI’s lack of flexible scaling also poses challenges when organizations want to retire or replace outdated equipment. Mixing old and new equipment within the same cluster is almost impossible.

The typical HCI setup often means organizations must create separate instances for workloads and hardware types. This approach fragments the overall infrastructure and creates more complexity, reducing operational efficiency and leading to underutilized resources. The inability to mix and match different types of nodes within the same cluster further diminishes the flexibility and cost-effectiveness of HCI.

UCI Scales Flexibly

On the other hand, UCI provides an answer to the rigidness of HCI. VergeOS supports multiple types of nodes, such as compute-only or storage-only nodes, which allows it to scale flexibly to match the dynamic needs of the business. As technology evolves and new hardware becomes available, VergeOS users can integrate these advances seamlessly into their existing setup. Customers can, for example, mix in AMD, Intel, and GPU nodes into the same instance.

Furthermore, with VergeOS, it’s possible to maintain a diverse set of hardware in a single instance, preventing infrastructure fragmentation. This capability allows businesses to adjust their IT setup as the organization grows and its needs change, ensuring they always have the most cost-effective and efficient infrastructure.

HCI isn't an Infrastructure


Conclusion

VergeOS is an ideal solution for businesses seeking a flexible, scalable, and efficient IT infrastructure. UCI surpasses HCI in meeting the demands of a dynamic business environment, ensuring that businesses can focus on their core competencies without worrying about their infrastructure. Whether it’s a small enterprise looking to grow or a large organization needing to maintain agility and efficiency, VergeOS has the features and flexibility to accommodate their needs. Compare HCI with UCI here.

To learn more about scaling IT infrastructure, watch our on-demand webinar, “How to Eliminate the Data Center Scale Problem.”

Filed Under: HCI Tagged With: ,

by

The performance impact of retention means that VMware snapshots have a high cost, which further means that IT professionals must compensate by investing more than they should into storage and backup infrastructure. Below are the best practices of VMware’s snapshot functionality, according to VMware’s knowledge base article:

  1. Don’t Use Snapshots As Backups
  2. While the maximum number of supported snapshots per virtual machine is 32, the best practice is not to use more than 2 or 3.
  3. Don’t retain a snapshot for more than 72 hours.
  4. Ensure that snapshots are deleted when using third-party backup software
  5. Never increase the virtual machine disk size while there are active snapshots.

The weaknesses of VMware’s Snapshots are just one of the hidden costs of using VMware in the data center. To learn all four, watch our on-demand webinar, “The 4 Hidden Costs of VMware“.

VMware Snapshots Are Not Backups

VMware states the reason VMware snapshots should not be considered backups of virtual machines (VMs) is “The snapshot file is only a change log of the original virtual disk. It creates a placeholder disk, virtual_machine-00000x-delta.vmdk, to store data changes since the snapshot was created. If the base disks are deleted, the snapshot files are insufficient to restore a virtual machine.”

The need to track changes in a separate file means that every time new data is written to a VM’s primary volume, it leads to significant overhead and dependency on the original volume. The overhead limits customers’ ability to use VMware’s snapshot technology for backup because only two or three snapshots can be active at any point in time. The dependency is the final nail in the coffin. If the primary fails, then all of your snapshots become useless.

The Impact of VMware Snapshots Not Being Backups

Most customers would still choose a separate backup software solution even if VMware could provide unlimited snapshots without performance impact. The fact that VMware snapshots are so hindered forces customers to invest more heavily in a backup solution. The weakness of VMware’s data protection capabilities has led to the creation of companies like Veeam and fueled its growth.

Backup solutions are the only products that can extract any usefulness from VMware Snapshots. They can execute one VMware snapshot, mount it to their backup application, and back it up. Then when the backup completes, the software can delete the snapshot it took so it doesn’t impact overall performance. That same knowledge base article advises IT to make sure their backup software selection can delete the snapshots it takes. (Item 4 above)

The Cost of VMware Snapshots Not Being Backups

VMware’s deficient snapshot capability is not unique. Although not as severe, many dedicated storage systems have similar limitations on how frequently you can execute a snapshot and how long you can retain those snapshots. All of the legacy snapshot technologies are plagued with this problem. Each successive snapshot depends on the snapshot before it, and all snapshots depend on the original volume. If that original volume is removed, all the snapshots are invalidated.

One of the most important priorities for IT is to protect the digital assets that the organization creates and uses to make decisions. Since that priority is paramount, IT must work around the weakness in snapshot technology and invest in a separate process, backup, and recovery, to mitigate the risk.

The investment in the backup and recovery process is not insignificant. There is the cost of the backup software and the need for and cost of a separate storage system. There is also the cost of time to transfer that data from production storage to the secondary storage device. The transfer time means significant gaps in which data is unprotected, something ransomware uses to its advantage. Finally, there is also the time involved in transferring data back into production if something goes wrong with primary storage. There is a place for separate backup and recovery, but it should not be the primary means to protect and recover production data.

IT professionals largely ignore the cost impact of these limitations because they assume that there is no alternative.

The Clone Alternative to VMware Snapshots

As discussed in our previous article, “Snapshots or Clones for Data Protection”, a Clone, i.e., a complete copy of a virtual machine or volume, except for one limitation, is a much better means to protect data:

  1. Clones are independent
  2. Clones don’t impact performance
  3. Clones can be retained indefinitely

A limitation of clones is that they are exact copies of the original, which means there is a transfer time problem and a capacity consumption issue. This limitation goes away, though, if, at an infrastructure level, global inline deduplication is integrated into the core code. Global inline deduplication enables the creation of copies of any virtual machine, or even the entire environment. The clones can be made near instantly, and they, initially, don’t consume any capacity.

The problem is that most deduplication technology is an afterthought, especially within hypervisor software. VMware introduced deduplication into vSAN years after the initial release, and Nutanix waited even longer. Adding deduplication as a bolt-on years after the initial introduction means that the algorithm adds processing overhead to the environment, dramatically impacting performance and decreasing virtual machine density.

To some extent, IT can work around the overhead of deduplication by buying more powerful servers and adding more RAM to those servers, all of which add significant costs to the infrastructure. Alternatively, IT can purchase a dedicated storage array. Still, as we explain in our article, “The High Cost of Dedicated Storage,”, that approach also increases the cost of the infrastructure.

IOclone: Eliminating Costs While Increasing Resiliency

VergeIO integrates deduplication into VergeOS, and it isn’t a bolt-on. Global Inline Deduplication has been at the core of VergeOS since day one. As a result, it operates very efficiently and with no performance impact compared to legacy solutions. This means creating a clone using VergeOS’ IOclone capability; it happens instantly with virtually no initial impact on capacity. Also, these clones are not dependent on the original copy. They are standalone and don’t impact performance, nor do they have retention limitations.

VMware snapshots have a high cost

VergeOS’ Global Inline Deduplication is also WAN aware, so IT can replicate production data and clones to remote DR sites or other data centers using minimal bandwidth and time. Moving data to a second VergeOS instance meets the “one copy off-site” requirement common in most data protection strategies.

Thanks to VergeOS’ foundational implementation of global inline deduplication, IOclone merges the best of both snapshots and clones to deliver unprecedented data protection and resilience. It is also why we refer to them as snapshots within our GUI. It is another example of the benefits of solving problems holistically at the infrastructure level instead of myopically at the data level. Watch our on-demand webinar, “Creating a Holistic Ransomware Response,” to see another example of solving problems at an infrastructure level.

While some VergeIO customers have eliminated backup as a separate process, you still may want to continue with your backup and recovery strategy, which VergeOS supports. Even if you do, the sophistication and expenses of that process are significantly reduced. While VMware snapshots have a high cost, IOclone does not. It is part of the reason customers who select VergeOS as their VMware alternative realize a reduction in the total cost of ownership by as much as 80% in addition to 30% or larger upfront licensing savings.

Filed Under: VMwareExit Tagged With: ,

by

At Verge.IO, we speak with two or three VMware customers daily, and they are all surprised when we expose VMware’s licensing paywall. Sure, they know the obvious upfront costs of VMware. Still, when they see the potential of VergeOS’s complete and fully integrated operating environment, they begin to understand that it is not just the cost of the license fee; it is also the cost associated with all the other modules or hardware you must buy because of the “modularity” of VMware’s offering.

VMware's Licensing Paywall

In our upcoming webinar, “The 4 Hidden Costs of VMware,” we dive deep into ways that, from a technical standpoint, VMware’s technology uses a paywall that effectively keeps your organization from being competitive. In this article, we will focus specifically on how VMware’s modular licensing model costs you money.

The Expensive Nature of the Three-Tier Architecture

The data center has three tiers; networking, computing, and storage. The legacy three-tier architecture consists of the following:

  1. A network built from proprietary network hardware from companies like Cisco.
  2. A server tier virtualized by something like VMware vSphere or Microsoft Hyper-V.
  3. A storage tier built from proprietary hardware from companies like Pure Storage or Dell/EMC.

The problem with this approach is it is costly and complex to manage. It typically requires experts for each tier, raising operational costs. It also requires continuous fine-tuning to ensure each workload gets the correct performance level.

Failed HCI Created a VMware Paywall

A few years ago, VMware had the idea of expanding what it did to the server tier, and virtualizing the other two tiers. They brought to market vSAN, purchased what would become NSX, and ushered in the Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) era. The promise was that life would be so much simpler for overburdened IT professionals.

Fast forward to today, and most organizations continue to run a traditional three-tier architecture, and IT pros are still beleaguered with IT tasks. What went wrong with HCI nirvana?

The first problem is that from a technology standpoint, the software-defined versions of networking and storage that VMware and others have brought to market pale in comparison to the specialized versions. There is also a challenge because each of these three software components is a separate code base, each representing double-digit millions of lines of code. Jamming them into a single server and attempting to scale out with multiple servers creates performance and scale issues. These technical issues require you to increase your hardware investment or stay with the legacy three-tier architecture. We explore them in our webinar.

VMware's Licensing Paywall


The second problem is from a business standpoint. VMware charges a lot for these licenses, so the tried and true hardware approach remains more appealing. Then there are also the challenges of all of the different versions of VMware, each with its own set of limitations.

vSphere Essentials is a VMware Paywall

VMware Essentials and Essentials Plus are designed to provide small to medium-sized data centers with a cost-effective way to acquire VMWare. Essentials is limited to no more than three physical nodes and they are licensed to no more than six total processors. The typical configuration is a two or three-node cluster with two processors in each server. A processor with more than 32 cores consumes two of the processor licenses.

These solutions are priced aggressively but have the most expensive paywall to get through in order to get the features you need. Essentials features are as bare as you can get and, for the most part, provide only the virtualization layer. Essentials Plus adds the basics of what you hope to get by virtualizing servers like vMotion, Cross Switch vMotion, High Availability, and vSphere Replication. The upcharge to Essentials is significant, more than 10X the price!

Another example of VMware’s licensing paywall is that neither Essentials nor Essentials Plus includes vSAN. To get vSAN, customers need to purchase VMware HCI Kit Essentials, which is 3X the cost of Essentials Plus. The result is that most customers we speak to, use VMware Essentials Plus with a dedicated SAN, skyrocketing the infrastructure cost. As we discussed in our last article, “The High Cost of Dedicated Storage,” the delta of adding server class flash drives to a server instead of buying a dedicated array is significant. It is also important to note that neither of the two Essentials editions support Storage vMotion.

Remember networking? None of the three flavors of Essentials does much with networking beyond a virtual switch. If you want to use commodity switches instead of more expensive proprietary switches, VMware will offer you NSX. It also has more advanced capabilities like routing, firewalling, and virtual private networking. All of these capabilities can dramatically reduce data center costs, but the cost of NSX more than doubles the cost of the implementations.

VMware Essentials is a perfect example of why understanding the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is critical. VMware’s licensing paywall makes the TCO of your infrastructure increase with each upgrade. While the entry price may be very attractive, the total cost is not. The cost of forcing small to medium-sized businesses to use the proprietary network and storage hardware to avoid additional software licensing is significant. Each component is potentially 25X or more the cost of the Essentials software.

It doesn’t have to be this way! Both storage and networking components have long since been commoditized, with very reliable off-the-shelf alternatives available at a fraction of the cost. Yes, the software driving this hardware must be at least on par with the proprietary solutions. Again in our webinar, we will dive deep into that comparison.

Finally, there is the success penalty when your organization grows to the point that it needs more than three nodes or six processors in a cluster. The uplift from Essentials more than doubles, again, the price of your Essentials installation. Then you get to deal with a whole new level of modularity and feature compromise as VMware presents you with Standard Editions, Advanced Editions, Enterprise Editions, and Professional Editions, each with limitations and cost increases as you move to the next level.

vSphere Standard is a VMware Paywall

VMware’s licensing paywall doesn’t stop with Essentials. The story is the same for larger organizations already having vSphere Standard or vSphere Enterprise, except they are starting at a much higher price point. Pricing is still per CPU with limitations on the number of supported cores. As with Essentials adding vSAN or NSX doubles or triples the cost to license each CPU.

There are also upgrade options for “standard” users. For example, to get deduplication, you must upgrade from standard to advanced. You may be able to deduplicate data, but you inflate your price by almost 2X to get it. Do you want data-at-rest encryption? That is not in vSAN Advanced. You need to upgrade to Enterprise, almost doubling the price again!

Have you had enough?

VMware's Licensing Paywall

The Paywall-Free TCO of VergeOS

VergeOS integrates the networking, hypervisor, and storage into a single cohesive code base. It is one piece of software, not three separate modules whose only integration is that the logos match. From a technology perspective, the common code base means VergeOS can deliver better performance and greater machine density, even using your existing hardware. From a TCO perspective, it means you can get your sanity back.

VergeOS is priced per Node. You are free to put as many processors, cores, as much RAM, and storage as you want in that node. There is no additional charge. VergeOS comes with complete Layer 2 and Layer 3 network functionality, enabling you to use commodity off-the-shelf switches when you are ready, and eliminate purchasing purpose-built hardware like firewalls. To experience all the power of VergeOS’ networking capabilities, watch our latest LightBoard video, “The Advantages of VergeOS Networking.”

VergeOS also includes powerful and efficient storage functionality, including the industry’s most advanced global inline deduplication, data protection, disaster recovery, and ransomware resiliency. It leverages flash drives and hard disk drives inside the nodes to deliver the highest performance levels at a fraction of the cost of traditional storage systems.

Operational costs plummet with VergeOS. Our single code base means an IT Generalist can administer the entire environment. Our intelligent learning algorithm eliminates the need to fine-tune and manage redundancy settings. It provides complete self-optimization and self-healing.

As you transition more of your infrastructure to VergeOS, your TCO continues to improve. Our most frequent type of customer is a VMware convert, followed closely by Hyper-V customers. In most cases, they start with an upfront cost reduction of 35% to 50% and drive toward a TCO of well over 70%.

Conclusion

If you have had enough of VMware’s licensing paywall limiting how your organization can fully leverage innovations in technology to lower costs and drive innovation, then it is time to take a look at VergeOS. Reach out to us to schedule a short technical overview of the difference VergeOS can make.

Filed Under: Virtualization Tagged With: ,