Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb. 2013 February, 2013 Sizing & TCO for bullion.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb. 2013 February, 2013 Sizing & TCO for bullion."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb February, 2013 Sizing & TCO for bullion

2 2 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Agenda Sizing: – Methodology – Bullion performance numbers – Consolidation (scale-out vs. scale-up) – Excel tool TCO: – Examples – Excel tool

3 3 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Input data Inventory of physical servers and VMs to by replaced by bullions => enables to find the SPECint*rate performance Performance requirements (SPECint*rate, SAPS, …) Physical : number of cores, GHz, sockets, RAM size Number of VMs and possible VM consolidation ESXi over-commitment ratio for CPU and memory : usually from 1 to 5 according the performance expected for the applications IOs : bandwith for vMotion, for VMs, H.A. High Availability : number of nodes in the cluster DRS (2 sites) : yes or no; 1 or 2 clusters(synchronous/asynchronous)

4 4 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb bullion perf. (1) ratio within E seriesE cores 1.86 GHz 95W H.TE cores 2.00 GHz 105W H.TE cores 2.13 GHz 105W H.TE cores 2.66 GHz 130W No H.TE cores 2.00 GHz 130W H.TE7-8867L 10 cores 2.13 GHz 105W H.TE cores 2.26 GHz 130W H.TE cores 2.40 GHz 130W H.T ratio perf (2) E7-xxxx/E perf 4 sock. bullion (3) perf 8 sock. bullion (3) (3) perf 12 sock bullion (4) perf 16 sock bullion (3) ratio perf/price bullion 4s E is the best ratio perf./price in 10 cores (1) SPECint*rate_base2006 (2)Intel reference (3) Published on spec.org (4) estimated E is the best ratio perf/price in 8 cores E is the best perf

5 5 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb CPU perf. (native Linux SPECint®_rate2006 with E7-4870) Perfect linearity Scalability ~x4 (x3.67)

6 6 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb SPECint*rate BenchmarkHardware VendorSystemResultBaseline# Cores# Chips CINT2006rateBull SASbullion E (160 cores - 4TB RAM) CINT2006rateHewlett-Packard CompanyProLiant DL980 G7 (2.4 GHz, Intel Xeon E7-4870) CINT2006rateBull SASbullion E (80 cores - 2TB RAM) CINT2006rateHITACHIBladeSymphony BS2000 (Intel Xeon E7-8870) CINT2006rateHITACHICompute Blade 2000 (Intel Xeon E7-8870) CINT2006rateUnisys CorporationUnisys ES7000 Model 7600R G3 (Intel Xeon E7-8870) CINT2006rateNEC CorporationExpress5800/A1080a-E (Intel Xeon E7-8870) CINT2006rateFujitsuPRIMEQUEST 1800E2, Intel Xeon E7-8870, 2.40 GHz CINT2006rateFujitsuPRIMERGY RX900 S2, Intel Xeon E7-8870, 2.40 GHz CINT2006rateIBM CorporationIBM System x 3850 X5 (Intel Xeon E7-8870) BCS or BCS-like Glueless 8 sockets

7 7 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Intel Xeon Processor E5 and E7 performance comparison Intel Xeon E series ideal for data-demanding application performance Intel Xeon E for HPC Bullion 4-sockets

8 8 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb On-Line Transaction Processing (OLTP) perf. bullion E with VMware tpmC (estimation) tpsE (estimation) 4 sockets~ 2,800,000~ 2,700 8 sockets~ 5,500,000~ 4, sockets~ 7,500,000~ 7, sockets~ 10,000,000~ 9,500

9 9 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Virtualization perf. : SPECvirt benchmark Bullion with VMware SPECvirt_sc sockets (X7560) (28 tiles) (1) 8 sockets (E7-4870) (85 tiles) (2) 12 sockets N/A (3) 16 sockets N/A (3) (1)published in February 2011 with 512GB, 32 cores & ESXi 4.1 (2)estimation (3)ESXi V5 is limited to 512 VMs and 160 logical CPUs

10 10 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb ERP performance bullion with VMware SAPS 4 sockets (X7560) (1) 8 sockets (E7-4870) (2) 12 sockets (E7-4870) (2) 16 sockets (E7-4870) (2) (1) published in may 2010 with 128 GB in a 2-tier SD architecture (2) estimation in a 3-tier SD architecture

11 11 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb In each server : VMs of 8 vCPUs 2 VMs of 8 vCPUs => no vCPU left VM of 16 vCPUs 1 VM of 16 vCPUs VM of 32 vCPUs 0 VM of 32 vCPUs In each server : VMs of 8 vCPUs 16 VMs of 8 vCPUs VMs of 16 vCPUs 32 vCPUs left VMs of 32 vCPUs 8 VMs of 16 vCPUs => 32 vCPUs left 4 VMs of 32 vCPUs 2 VMs of 64 vCPUs 2 VMs of 64 vCPUs VMs limited to 16 vCPUs Load peaks => servers are 100% full vMotion impossible = 8 vms w/ vCPUs 20x 16-core servers => 20 ESXi2x 160-core bullions => 2 ESXi No limitation on the VM size Load peak: fully managed (without vMotion) vMotion possible for big VMs scale-out ) scale-out (2-socket x 8-core servers) scale-up scale-up (16-socket x10-core bullions) CPU load & VMs: comparison scale-out/scale-up 32 free vCPUs same number of cores (320)

12 12 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb cores used 512 cores paid = 8 vCPUs 256 cores used cores paid 32 free vCPUs HW investissement : -37,5 % 32x 16-core servers => 32 ESXi2x 160-core bullions => 2 ESXi scale-out ) scale-out (2-socket x 8-core servers) scale-up scale-up (16-socket x10-core bullions) CPU load & VMs: comparison scale-out/scale-up

13 13 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb cores used 512 cores paid 320 cores used 400 cores paid HW investment : -22 % Performance : +25% HA VMware 32x 16-core servers => 32 ESXi5x 80-core bullions => 5 ESXi = 8 vCPUs scale-out ) scale-out (2-socket x 8-core servers) scale-up scale-up (8-socket x10-core bullions) CPU load & VMs: comparison scale-out/scale-up

14 14 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb free vCPUs Communication through the NICs Communication internal to bullion => less Eth. adapters/cables/switches => best performance = 8 vCPUs 32x 16-core servers => 32 ESXi2x 160-core bullions => 2 ESXi scale-out ) scale-out (2-socket x 8-core servers) scale-up scale-up (16-socket x10-core bullions) CPU load & VMs: comparison scale-out/scale-up

15 15 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb VMs : size and quantity In a 16 socket bullion you can theoretically fit up to 5 VMs with 32 vCPUs with one physical core available for each vCPU (160 cores) with best performance (no over-commitment) On a 4 socket X7560 bullion (64 logical CPUs with H.T.), we could run 168 VMs with a CPU over-commitment of x2,6 and a good QoS (cf SpecVirt constraints): 28 tiles each one with 6 VMs (with 1 vCPU): – 1 DB server + 1 JAVA Application Servers + 1 mail server + 1 WEB server + 1 NFS server + 1 server in standby to measure the latency of the network latency (SPECpoll, 99,5% of request < 1 s) Some consolidation projects allow to consolidate VMs inside the same cluster: allows reduction of the necessary HW (CPU, RAM, IOs)

16 16 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb VDI sizing For Citrix XenDesktop (used above ESXi hypervisor): 1 VM per user 1 physical core for 8 VMs 1 GB of memory per VM (no memory over commitment in order to avoid swapping) More precisely, memory varies according the OS guest : from 512 MB for a Windows XP VM to 2 GB for Windows 7 VM Example: for 1500 concurrent users => 190 cores (1500/8) & 1,5 TB memory Configuration must be tuned to take into account the following: Considerations about load and HA (number of ESX) Hosting of other necessary VMs for XenApp (XenApp broker,...) other CITRIX modules Consolidation of other applications Etc.

17 17 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb CPU/memory load & High Availability use several bullions (ESXi) for your VMware cluster : if one ESXi/bullion fails, VMware HA will restart the VMs on the other bullions Minimum is 2 bullions (fail-safe / maintenance) For no perf degradation (no CPU/memory over-commitment*): – 50% average load for 2 bullions – 67% average load for 3 bullions <= best compromise – 75% average load for 4 bullions – 80% average load above *max average load regardless of number of bullions s.b. up to 80%

18 18 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb CPU consolidation Consolidating an existing park of small (1/2 sockets) physical servers By default consider average CPU load to be no more than 15% Use Capacity Planner to obtain the exact number (e.g. XX => 7% CPU for 49 servers) Consolidating an existing park of small (1/2 sockets) virtualized servers By default consider the average CPU load to be 50% Use Capacity Planner to obtain the exact number bullion proposition : 80% bullion should be sized for an average load of up to 80%

19 19 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Memory consolidation get the amount and load of memory of existing park to be consolidated % memory load is either given by an audit tool like Capacity Planner, or use 80% if you don’t know sizing rules for the memory in bullion are the same than CPU (50%-50%, 67%-67%-67%, max 80%)

20 20 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb bullion Inputs/Outputs sizing I/O : check the capabilities of bullion : 6 PCIe adapters / module : FC 4/8 Gbps, Ethernet 1/10 Gbps 4 internal 1 GigE / module WARNING: check bullion limitations with multi-modules Consider that VMs running in the same server (specially 16 sockets) allows to reduce the number of Ethernet adapters compared to smaller servers where VMs need to communicate out of the server

21 21 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Sizing Ethernet communication For applications with many IOs between VMs (e.g. Xerox dematerialisation application) : => you may decrease up to ~25% your global bullion configuration (compared to a small server) For applications with not many IOS between VMs (e.g. VDI): => decrease from -5% your global bullion configuration

22 22 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb IO configurations max for quadri-module bullion Activated Kawela (1 GigE) MegaRAID (disks) LPE12002/1250 (FC) I350-T2 (1 GigE) i350-T4 (1 GigE) X520-SR2/T2 * (10 gigE) * X520-DA2 can be ordered through SFR smaller configurations are possible by removing adapters

23 23 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb IO configurations max for tri-module bullion Activated Kawela (1 GigE) 000 MegaRAID (disks) 001 LPE12002/1250 (FC) 665 I350-T2 (1 GigE) 022 i350-T4 (1 GigE) 400 X520-SR2/T2 * (10 GigE) 033 * X520-DA2 can be ordered through SFR smaller configurations are possible by removing adapters

24 24 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Activated Kawela (1 GigE) *2** MegaRAID LPE12002/1250 (FC) i350-T2 (1 GigE) i350-T4 (1 GigE) X520-SR2/T2 (10 GigE) IO configurations max for bi-module bullion SFR only * vSphere 5 maximum of 8x Eth 10 Gbps ports is respected smaller configurations are possible by removing adapters ** vSphere 5 maximum of Eth combinated 6x 10 Gbps ports + 4x 1 Gbps ports is respected

25 25 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Ethernet network example for a bi-module - 2 links 10 Gb/s dedicated to vMotion (1 TB can be evacuated in ~20’) + admin VMware – huge bandwith for the VMs (6 links 10 Gb/s) – internal bandwith inter-modules very important (~300 Gb/s)) – Hyper-Threading can be activated (perf %)

26 26 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb FC SAN example for a bi-module -4 HBAs (2 HBAs per module) -4 boot paths

27 27 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Bullion sizing calculator (excel file)

28 28 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Sizing exercise Propose an alternative solution with bullions to a DC with : -20 blades UCS B200 M2 (2x 6-core CPU X5690), 96 GB mem/blade -SPECint*rate 1 blade = 432

29 29 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Sizing exercise -SPECint*rate 1 UCS B200 M2 (2x 6-core CPU X5690) = blades => SPECint*rate -CPU load blade = 50% => SPECint*rate -3 bi-module E bullions provide : - With a 100% CPU load: 4256 SPECint*rate, i.e. 101% of the target - With a 2/3 CPU load: 2851 SPECint*rate, i.e. 68% of the target -4 bi-module E bullions provide : - With a 100% CPU load: 5674 SPECint*rate, i.e. 134% of the target - With a 2/3 CPU load: 4256 SPECint*rate, i.e. 101% of the target A good choice is to propose 4 bi-module E bullions

30 30 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Project example: target architecture

31 31 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Comparison blades vs bullion 1 blade 4 sockets E cores/ 256 GB (32 DIMMs of 8 Go; max 48 DIMMs) + 1 châssis + Fabric Extender + 1 switch Fabric Interconnect 7U + 2U watts 1 module bullion 4 sockets E cores / 256 GB (32 DIMMs of 8 Go; max 64 DIMMs) 3U 900 watts (-42%) blades bullion

32 32 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb FermatGalois Fermat Project example : initial proposal Needs : 752 vCPUs => /5 = 150 cores 1504 GB vRAM => x 0,7 = 1052 Go 4 blades => 4 ESXi 16 sockets (160 cores) GB 18 U watts 4 servers bullion => 4 ESXi 16 sockets (160 cores) GB 12 U watts (-32%) blades bullion

33 33 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb FermatGaloisFermatGalois Project example: 1 st evolution 10 blades=> 10 ESXi 36 sockets (360 cores) GB 32 U watts vSphere licenses (Entreprise+): 36 sockets x $4152 = $149,500 4 servers bullion => 4 ESXi 32 sockets (320 cores) GB 24 U watts (-29%) vSphere licenses (Entreprise+): 32 sockets x $4152 = $132,885 (- 12%) Needs: 1799 vCPUs => /5 = 360 cores vRAM GB => x 0,7 = GB blades bullion

34 34 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Fermat Galois Project example: 2 nd evolution 16 blades => 16 ESXi 60 sockets (600 cores) GB 32 U watts vSphere licenses (Entreprise+): 58 sockets x $4152 = $240,239 4 servers bullion=> 4 ESXi 48 sockets (480 cores) GB 36 U watts (-25%) vSphere licenses (Entreprise+): 48 sockets x $4152 = $199,327 (-17%) Needs: 2847 vCPUs => /5 = 570 cores vRAM GB => x 0,7 = GB +25% still available for future upgrade without adding servers blades bullion Fermat Galois Need to add 2 extra chassis (+14U ) in order to add more than 2 CPUs Project example: 2 nd evolution +25% still available for future upgrade without adding servers

35 35 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Example #2 Requirements (split in 2 datacenters for PRA): 428 VMs (spread among 10 application domains) cores (/40 = 68,9) RAM GB Bullion scenarios: Scénario MONO Totalper DCActual Total modules without VM consolidation7738,539 Total modules 78 Total RAM9 832 RAM per serveur Total cores Scenario QUADTotalper DCActual Total modules with VM consolidation68,934,4535 Total quad bullions per DC 1899 Total modules 72 Total RAM RAM per serveur Total cores Scenario QUAD optimized (consolidation -7% )Totalper DCActual Total modules32 64 Total servers88 6 modules less 14 modules less

36 36 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb TCO calculation TCO 3 years UCS B200Bullion Capex Total Hardware$329,250 $368,760 Hardware Installation$3424 $1712 VMware licenses $136,178 $37,718 Opex Hardware administration$61,635 $20,545 Hardware Maintenance subscription $ $16,352 ESXi Admin/Maintenance$51,363$5136 Power supply$214,287$65,619 Space use$11,853 Total$827,904$527,697 savings with bullion = $300,20736% -Quantity of HW to install/maintain -Nb of licenses based on nb of sockets -Power consumption -Space in Data Center -Nb of VMware nodes

37 37 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb TCO calculator bullion (excel file)

38 38 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb Summary bullion : best performance & capacity (4110 SPECint*rate, 160 cores, 2 TB) => ideal for consolidation Consolidation: – HW (sockets, memory, IO adapters) – VMs Tools: – Sizing tool (based on SPECint*rate and number of cluster nodes) – TCO (comparison against competition: OPEX, CAPEX 3 & 5 years)

39 39 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb. 2013


Download ppt "1 © Bull, 2013 BTSA Feb. 2013 February, 2013 Sizing & TCO for bullion."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google