Is Hyper-V the right choice?
Five reasons enterprises are migrating to Microsoft's virtualisation technology:
Click to enlarge the image
VMware® had better watch out. Despite holding 95% of the market for x86 server virtualisation, clear leadership with key innovations such as VMotion™, and a particularly stable technology, VMware is facing a new challenger in the market. Microsoft claims to have arrived at the right time, with the right tools. For enterprises that have been hesitant about adopting virtualisation, Microsoft has some pretty convincing things to say.
Businesses that have already deployed VMware virtualisation solutions are unlikely to change suppliers soon, staying with their current deployment for the next three or four years. That said, some users such as NafNaf, the ready-to-wear fashion chain, have already migrated from ESX to Hyper-V™.
But the market trend is clear, with vendors including NetApp®, Emulex™, Sun™, Citrix™, DataCore™, F5 ®, Neverfail™, LeftHand® Networks and Double-Take® Software announcing support for the Hyper-V environment. Microsoft can also rely on its massive installed base. Where does this leave VMware? Some CIOs believe Microsoft will find it difficult to close the gap with VMware's technological advance, while for others using Microsoft's virtualisation solutions to virtualise their Microsoft servers is putting all their eggs in the same basket. But certain major enterprises, including Bouygues Construction, EDF, and Arkema have already made the move. Here are some of the reasons why:
1) Hyper-V has many of the features of ESX
Virtualisation is integrated in Windows® Server 2008, and in October Microsoft introduced Hyper-V Server, a standalone version of Hyper-V without the OS, a close match for VMware's ESXi. But while Microsoft has already shown demonstration versions of Live Migration, its response to VMware VMotion, the product is not expected to be available until Windows Server 2008 version R2 is released sometime in 2009. And Live Migration re-quires a server shutdown, where VMotion delivers uninterrupted migration.
2) Price
Microsoft is pinning its hopes on beating VMware on price. According to American consultants Clabby Analytics, ESX-based virtualisation costs three times as much as Hyper-V. Many, however, disagree and one major account reports that the ROI isn't that easy to calculate, reckoning the costs as broadly equivalent for the competing technologies.
3) Management features
On October 21st Microsoft announced the product Virtual Server R2/ Hyper-V customers had been waiting for. System Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) is Microsoft's virtualisation management platform – and unlike VMware Virtual Center, SCVMM supports both ESX and Hyper-V.
4) Single point of contact
Certain customers are choosing Hyper-V because it simplifies support. With Microsoft Windows Server 2008 running on their servers, they feel more comfortable with a single point of contact for all their server technologies. But other users see this differently; for them, there's a risk in putting all your eggs in one basket.
5) Backups
Backup is a critical point in virtualised environments. Microsoft System Center Data Protection Manager provides virtual server backup without the need to integrate third-party utilities. |
|
VMware's Fault Tolerance Has Limits
Fault Tolerance, a new feature announced by VMware at VMworld 08 in Las Vegas, is intended to respond to the needs of certain customers for a very high availability solution. Up to now, “high availability” (HA) managed failover from one server to another in case of failure, but with a delay of several seconds. Fault Tolerance maintains a simultaneous copy of a given virtual server; any event on one of the machines is replicated instantaneously on the other. If one server fails sessions are immediately picked up by the other server with no interruption of service. This puts VMware in direct competition with several of its own partners – Double-Take, Stratus® Technologies, or NEC, to name just three. However, users who've looked into the question say that while Fault Tolerance is a step in the right direction it lacks a number features offered by third-party products. To start with, VMware Fault Tolerance only supports machines in the same server farm, where products such as Double-Take GeoCluster support true remote failover on multisite wide-area clusters of physical or virtual servers. For disaster recovery or business continuity planning, the difference is essential.
Links :
An earlier IT Recovery news report
A Geocluster video
|
|
