The up.time IT Systems Management Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Cloud Monitoring’

2010 – The Year of Cloud Experimentation – Part 1 of 2

Monday, November 30th, 2009

At uptime software, we’ve been quite bullish on Cloud’s potential but feel it still has some distance to cover before it lives up to the hype. In fact, I wrote a blog in January looking at a hypothetical company and the costs involved in moving an entire infrastructure into the Cloud (using Amazon EC2). The results were not impressive, Cloud computing was too expensive (in this example) to gain the critical mass it needs to catch on. It’s amazing how much had changed in the ten months since that blog, as we have learned more about how the Cloud can be best utilized. Recently, the media has driven the Cloud excitement and IT managers are now thinking about how the Cloud, in one form or another, can be used in their environments to drive performance and efficiencies.

The real question is this; in what capacity will organizations adopt Cloud over the next few years? With that in mind, we see the coming year as one of exploration and experimentation. The first step is for companies to quantify what Cloud means to their business.  Is it as banal as remote storage used for DR purposes, or something as evolved as dynamic compute with secure private/public networking?

Let’s take a look at the “IT Spectrum,” which is loosely aligned with IT maturity and size of organization.

In this diagram, the left represents most small businesses who house their own servers and have a small number of IT staff.  As the small business matures, they may evaluate SaaS-type applications (like Salesforce.com) or push some servers out to an MSP.  Further maturing, or growing, businesses may have additional servers in remote hosted datacenters, like web servers or remote disaster recovery storage.  At the right-most point in the spectrum, businesses/enterprises have opted to completely outsource their IT and minimize the number of IT staff employed by the business.

Understanding the spectrum’s components is important. They represent a “menu” of options that businesses can use to leverage virtualization and cloud technologies to reduce costs (either labor or infrastructure).  This “menu” is most likely how IT managers will choose to evaluate the relevance of Cloud to cost savings and enhanced service delivery.  For example, with VMware’s new VBlock offering and the ongoing relationship with Terremark, entire stacks of infrastructure can be pushed into off-premises locations and operated in a mission-critical environment. So, whether it’s just dipping a toe into the Cloud waters (like hosting a server in Amazon EC2 or the RackSpace Cloud to deliver a decoupled application) or leveraging the VBlock to move entire mission critical infrastructures, there are many options to consider. Keep in mind that issues such as backup management, lifecycle management, and systems management need to be addressed in all cases.

How is the experimentation starting?

[ more next week in Part 2 ]

Microsoft finally draws their line in the clouds

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

As many of you are likely aware, last week Ray Ozzie announced that Azure (Microsoft’s cloud service) would go into full production on January 1st, 2010. Azure is interesting because Microsoft wants to keep the paradigm of desktop OS’s as a key part of the architecture with “the cloud” as an adjunct in what they call the “three screens and a cloud” vision. This vision is important, because it makes the cloud real for consumers and makes it more understandable and accessible to the general populace. Project “Dallas” also re-affirms Microsoft’s commitment to cloud computing as a whole, Microsoft unveiled just enough details to make the project interesting – i.e.  data-as-a-service.

For all the “evil empire” slag that Microsoft gets, people tend to forget, or ignore, what happens when Microsoft embraces a technology and tries to dominate that market – the technology just gets easier to adopt and becomes more real.

This is an important milestone in the development of the entire “cloud story”. Let’s be clear – Microsoft, due to their size and market position, does not have the need to innovate or invent new paradigms. All they have to do, and what they are good at, is step into nascent markets that are at the edge of becoming mature enough to explode. This is generally a moment of truth for any incumbents, as Microsoft can and does take advantage of their massive resources in an all out war for dominance. Once they ‘put their toes in the water’, they slowly wage a war of attrition on the incumbents, and buy all the best players and minds, until eventually their technology is pervasive.  We have seen this strategy in effect to great success over the years. Remember the browser wars, Database (SQL?), ERP, CRM, Content Management (Sharepoint), Audio Devices (Zune), Console Gaming (XBox) and the list goes on.

So what’s the moral of the story? When Microsoft wades into the game, it’s a very strong sign that it’s time to get with the program and adopt this emerging pardigm.

451 Group – Cloud Codex

Friday, November 20th, 2009

The 451 Group just recently posted their CloudScape summary, or Cloud Codex.  It can be obtained  from here (http://www.451group.com/cloudscape/cloudscape_report_detail.php?icid=869).  I consider this report to be a very thorough summary of the current Cloud landscape and the various issues that surround Cloud architectures and deployments.  I’d like to summarize a few salient points from the report:

The report defines various kinds of Cloud computing (closed private cloud, community private cloud, hosted private cloud, enterprise public cloud, and commodity public cloud) and then goes on to define the four pillars that support these clouds: management, automation, security, and storage.  These pillars then sit on top of the underlying hardware (network gear, x86 servers, mass storage, and virtualization software).

Of particular interest to us is the cloud management and automation, specifically: cloud monitoring, analytics; and provisioning, and orchestration.  Application performance in the cloud is going to become an issue and you’ll need management tooling that can quickly drill down into the application stack, virtualization layer, and physical infrastructure to identify performance issues.  Analytics then becomes important to understand correlations between cloud infrastructure (and possibly private infrastructure as well).

On the automation side, as applications become increasingly elastic, cloud management tooling is going to have to understand dynamic changes in infrastructure and be able to adjust the number of elements being monitored in real-time.  The tooling will also have to be able to trigger orchestration events in the cloud to react to certain kinds of load (or outage) scenarios.

As cloud evolves, so will we, these are exciting times.

Alex

P.S. Here’s my plug, of course, check out our cloud monitoring information. Lots more to come.

The Cloud goes beyond Virtualization

Thursday, November 12th, 2009

There is a article over at The Cloud Option discussing how virtualization is not Cloud.  It is summed up very well in this statement:

“Cloud/IaaS goes beyond virtualization by providing extra services for dynamically allocating infrastructure resources to match the peaks and valleys of application demand.”

I think that when people discuss the public/private cloud, this is an often understated point.  Simply virtualizing your existing infrastructure with your favourite hypervisor does not mean you have implemented a private cloud within your datacenter.  Cloud is about enablement, not virtualization.  As ‘The Cloud Option’ says, virtualization is a valuable first step, but it is not Cloud.

From my perspective, Cloud is all about the ability to deploy and manage business services without the involvement of an infrastructure team.  If you develop application X for the Cloud, given the right permissions, you should be able to provision the application into production without ever involving someone from the IT department responsible for providing the Cloud resource.

Once provisioned, you should be able to manage, maintain and scale application X without ever involving IT.  Virtualization alone is never going to give you this.  Cloud is about tools, and given the infrastructure requirements to deliver todays applications and services, it’s about about simple tools performing complex tasks behind the scenes.  I go back to the article at ‘Cloud Option’ and, as they suggest, at a minimum the Cloud provider (internal or external) must bring:  Self Service, Resource Metring & Accountability, Image Management and Network Policy Enforcement.

up.time provides great visibility into your physical and virtual assets that are a part of your Cloud strategy, by provinding deep Cloud monitoring and Cloud management, as well as traditionally deployed applications.  In conjunction with our vOrchestrator integration, up.time can also provide resource automation for the scaling and provisioning of applications into the Cloud.

I think Terremark is heading down the right path with their Cloud offering, providing a complete solution to their customers with self management from the application to the virtual network and its security features.  I also think that as enterprises look to push their applications and data onto the Cloud, network capabilities are going to become the real differentiator between Cloud offerings.  We are at the point where virtualization at the server level is a known and pretty comodditized good.  However, at the network layer there are all kinds of opportunities to provide value as part of the overall Cloud offering.  From basic firewalling and load balancing to application aware layer 7 switching and deep packet manipulation, these are all capabilities that will allow Cloud providers like Terremark to differentiate themselves from one another.

Cost of cloud computing, expensive!

Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

With a large number of initiatives around cloud computing, I was interested in determining if the current cost of moving something like a lab environment into an outsourced environment would be cost effective.  Now, I realize that current ‘cloud’ offerings are really geared to dealing with temporary spikes in compute load rather than moving an entire infrastructure out of a corporate data center, however, mirroring a lab environment is perhaps a plausible use of the cloud.

This demonstration was simply to determine the monthly cost of hosting a lab environment in Amazon’s EC2 and then comparing it to the fully loaded cost of having a lab environment in house. 

The service that I ran the experiment on was Amazon’s EC2 and their storage service (S3) for persistent data management.  EC2 allows you to provision various types of x86 servers of differing compute capabilities and you are billed by instance hour of time.  There is no restriction on how compute intensive your instance is.  Their cost matrix for Linux instances and S3 storage can be viewed here and the Windows pricing is here.  The Windows pricing also includes options for SQL Server (and authentication services).
The experiments I ran were for five systems of various configurations running our application (up.time).  This included Linux running MySQL, Linux running Oracle, Windows running SQL Server and other combinations.  The databases were stored on Amazon’s EBS (Elastic Block Store) storage for persistence reasons.  The applications were run for two weeks under simulated load for monitoring 1,000 systems to get an idea of network and storage bandwidth.
After two weeks, the compute costs, I/O costs, and persistent storage costs were tallied and then scaled to mirror the monthly cost of a sample lab environment.
Amazon EC2 Costs for 300 lab instances.  There are 744 hours in a typical month (24*31).
Instance Type Num Cost/Instance Hour Compute Cost/Month
Windows 100 $0.125 $9,300
Windows + SQL Server 50 $1.100 $40,920
Linux 150 $0.100 $11,160
Windows (SQL/xlarge) 2 $2.400 $3,571.20
Total Cost Per Month $64,951.20
Storage Storage Cost/Month
5.6T (usable) $0.10 Gb/month $573.44
I/O 30B $0.10 per 1MM I/Os $300.00
Network Network Cost/Month
I/O 20 Gb $0.10 Gb/month $2.00
Total EC2 Cost/Month $64,826.64
Total EC2 Cost/Year $789,919.68

Now, if I calculate actual lab costs that mirror this environment here’s what we get (I’ve deliberately excluded our non-x86 platforms such as POWER and SPARC).  I’ve included the retail costs for Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle even though as an ISV we wouldn’t nearly pay as much.  The EC2 cost for Windows systems is considerably higher than Linux, and this is because of the software licensing costs blended into the instance hour calculation.

In the cases of leasing hardware, the number is more or less a constant cost as new gear is purchased and older gear is bought out. For software costs, they’ve been amortized over three years.

Gear Number Cost Per Month
Dell 1950 28
Dell 2950 2
HP DL585 2
10TB iSCSI 1 $10,000
Dell/HP/Equallogic Support $300
HVAC/Power $1,000
Floor Space 500 sq/ft $24 sq/ft/year $1,000
VMware ESX 9 $1,250
Annual Support (VMware) $1,250
Internet $1,200
Network Infrastructure $556
Total Infrastructure Cost/Month $16,556
Software Cost
SQL Server 2008 $2,083
Oracle 10g/11g $2,083
Labour Cost/Month $4,166
Total In-House Cost/Month $24,888.89
Total In-House Annual Cost $298,666.67
I’m torn about including labour, as instance management overhead is the same in both scenarios, however, the actual network and compute infrastructure when in-house, does require some amount of headcount.  In this case, I’ve added 0.5 of a resource (fully loaded cost).
So, the difference between an EC2 lab environment and an in-house environment is ($789,919.68 – $298,666.67) = $491,253.01.  This is quite a substantial difference for an always-on environment.
I am curious as to how many enterprises have truly dynamic workloads that could take advantage of a cloud (either internal or external) to truly derive the cost benefits of cloud computing.
Certainly, at first blush, a straight migration of servers is a costly proposition.
—————————–
Quick update: We have just launched uptimeCloud – the simple way to manage cost in the cloud. This new SaaS product will provide real-time, dynamic cloud cost monitoring, cloud cost forecasting, and cloud capacity management. for more, visit http://www.uptimecloud.com