1 / 23

DMC Technology Server Re-fresh

DMC Technology Server Re-fresh. Contents. Evaluate vendor Blade technology Develop a Blade architecture that meets DMC/PBB requirements Develop a stand-alone server re-fresh architecture

messer
Download Presentation

DMC Technology Server Re-fresh

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DMC Technology Server Re-fresh

  2. Contents • Evaluate vendor Blade technology • Develop a Blade architecture that meets DMC/PBB requirements • Develop a stand-alone server re-fresh architecture • CBA associated with migrating to a Blade architecture and it’s impact on relocating to a new data center. • Observations • Appendix

  3. Evaluate Vendor Blade Technology

  4. Evaluate vendor Blade technologyBlade Architecture Benefits • General Benefits (details slide 20 & 22) • Fewer Network ports • Less floor space • Less Electricity • Ease of manageability • Specific DMC Benefits (details slide 22) • Increased compute power (CPU & RAM) • Increased network scaling • More virtualization capabilities

  5. Evaluate vendor Blade technologyVendors Technology Evaluated • IBM • HP • Cisco

  6. Evaluate vendor Blade technologyVendor Technology Assessment Conclusion: Cisco V-Block is Not a good fit for DMC/PBB There are some fundamental distinctions that need to be taken into consideration when looking at how Vblock would support/fit DMC/PBB type services. • DMC production servers are not good virtual candidates which the V-Block infrastructure is primarily designed for. • DMC uses a file based NAS storage architecture (we have around 1.3 Petabytes of NAS).  Vblock uses a block based SAN storage technology. • Vblock uses 4 NAS data movers (higher end options may support 8 data movers).  DMC currently uses over 100 NAS data movers. • DMC uses a hierarchical/pooled tiered storage environment.  Vblock’s tiered management capable offering uses the high end Symmetrix FAST platform. • DMC is an open architecture that can support integration of different storage and server environments.  Vblock is a closed technology architecture.

  7. Evaluate vendor Blade technologyTechnology Assessment Conclusion: IBM is rated above HP, but not by a significant amount. Either IBM or HP would meet DMC/PBB needs. (If IBM pricing ends up being equal to or cheaper than HP, we would go with IBM.)

  8. Develop a Blade architecturewhich meets DMC/PBB requirements • Develop a stand-alone server re- fresh architecture Note: There are separate attachments covering the above two deliverables.

  9. CBA

  10. CBAConsiderations • Some servers will continue to be stand-alone and will require upgrading regardless if DMC moves to a Blade server architecture. • The new location has limited floor space within the initial build out allocation for DMC. • There are many variables that make it difficult to capture all costs associated with Blades and servers going into the new data center.

  11. CBAApproach The DMC server infrastructure was grouped as follows: Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh Key data analyzed (list is not prioritized): Racks needed Stand-alone servers Blade servers RAM Core compute power Network Ports Electrical power Floor space Associated pricing Working with IBM and HP, a Blade architecture was developed and priced in line with DMC/PBB requirements. The prices were not negotiated. HP provided pricing using the SPE standard discount and IBM provided what they called “budget planning” pricing.

  12. CBA Blade Architecture & Stand-Alone Server Upgrade Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh * See slide 23 for details The IBM & HP prices are not negotiated prices. HP used Standard SPE discount pricing IBM provided “budget planning” pricing.

  13. CBA Blade Architecture & Stand-Alone Server Upgrade Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh * See slide 23 for details The IBM & HP prices are not negotiated prices. HP used Standard SPE discount pricing IBM provided “budget planning” pricing.

  14. CBAServer Upgrade - No Blades(this is a separate plan from the blade architecture. There may be slightly different sever numbers versus blade number, because of differences associated with virtualization …) Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh *There are 240 DMC servers that make up the active server pool. 33 of these systems can not be upgraded. See slide 23 for details.

  15. CBACost Summary SAS=Stand-Alone Server *see Appendix: slide 20 ** Not upgrading will result in systems that will not be supportable, along with enhrent performance degradation. Capacity planning efforts show that DMG throughput requirements will continue to double year over year for the foreseeable future.

  16. Observations

  17. Observations • Based on the current layout and space allocations for DMC, If we do not move to Blades we will immediately use up all racks space planned for servers. (slides 19,20,22) • We should move forward with Blade upgrade of “Group A + B” prior to moving data centers. • With Blade migration, Compute power goes up significantly, while network port needs go down significantly, and space needs go down. (See Appendix: Data Elements slide 22.)

  18. Apendix

  19. New Data Center Layout This is the Petasite location There are 16 racks for servers Storage Location

  20. Facilities Costs *Note that fixed port costs going forward can be significantly higher if additional switching and power and space are needed when scaling…

  21. Upgrade Cost Details Using HP Blades & remaining stand-alone servers (SAS) costs: * See slide 20 SAS= Stand-alone Servers

  22. CBAData Elements No upgrades=more network ports used, more racks space needed, more electricity used, and less compute power. Note Compute power= cores+ram normalized divided by 10 Electricity detailed on slide 20 Network ports are normalized dividing by 10 Using IBM’s architecture as a baseline

  23. Non-Blade Able Servers 33 Non-upgrade Able 1 x PetaSite Console - tied to PetaSite 1 x RTL - Luxembourg transfer server 3 x Digital Backbone - Tatsu Oiye 5 x CW - colorworks hosted devices 7 x Apple servers 16 x Sun Server 29 Non-Blade Able, upgraded as Stand-Alone Servers 1 x FaspEX - requires lots of local disk space 3 x SQL DB - cannot get as much horsepower as we can with standalone 5 x Oracle DB - cannot get as much horsepower as we can with standalone 20 x Transcode Servers - require lots of local disk space

More Related