Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Is it Time to Reassess Your Availability Approach? David Edborg Chief Architect EMCC Assured Availability.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Is it Time to Reassess Your Availability Approach? David Edborg Chief Architect EMCC Assured Availability."— Presentation transcript:

1 1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Is it Time to Reassess Your Availability Approach? David Edborg Chief Architect EMCC Assured Availability Services

2 2© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Abstract Breakout C: Is It Time to Reassess Your Availability Approach? Information availability is in the middle of a period of intense change. What were acceptable business continuity and disaster recovery strategies even a year ago are now being questioned, and organizations must constantly re-examine information availability capabilities. For IT infrastructure, data center and disaster recovery managers, it has become a challenge to keep up. But this presentation can help. We will address the following questions: 1.What's causing the current shift in information availability? 2.What are the emerging technologies that IT managers should be discussing with their teams? 3.Is near-zero recovery time a realistic expectation? 4.How can companies deliver always-on IT while reducing cost and risk? David Edborg Chief Architect, EMC Availability Services EMC

3 3© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Which Philosophy Do You Subscribe To? Moore’s Law Gordon Moore “… the number of transistors on a microchip would double every two years.” Or Gretzky’s Rule Gretzky, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”

4 4© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Availability Challenges Today Pressure to Reduce Spend and Expand Services HA and DR Increased Complexity and Cost Users Expect Zero Downtime Planned Outage Approval Difficult Unplanned Outages Unacceptable

5 5© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. 1. Data Center Move (< 1%)  Relocations  Natural Disaster  Business Change, Merger or Acquisition 3. Scheduled Events (~85%)  Maintenance, migrations, backups/restores, batch jobs, installations or upgrades  Data warehouse extracts, builds, and loads Availability Impact of Event Types 2. Unscheduled Events (15%)  Technical Failure  Operational Failure

6 6© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Typical IT Availability Charter  External Maximize Uptime  Internal 1.Provide Scheduled Outages 2.Handle Unscheduled Outages 3.Accommodate Data Center Moves

7 7© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Traditional DR vs. Continuous Availability Utility company has a power failure at primary Data Center – backup DC with Tier-1 standby equipment 40 miles away & has power Hospital has a power failure at primary Data Center – Continuous Availability (CA) Architecture Downtime: 16 hoursDowntime: 0 hours Decision Wait until power is restored Reason Too long to fail-over and fail-back, critical apps have DR, non- critical do not Decision No event, no decision Reason CA environment with load balanced enabled production in both centers; if one site goes down, the processing load auto migrates to the other

8 8© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Why Rethink DR Traditions? Expensive to Implement Expensive to Maintain Expensive to Test During your last major disruption, did you even consider using your DR solution? …Unreliable And it isn’t useful for most Availability Events

9 9© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. So, … how did we get here? Traditional Disaster Recovery Tape Backup and Offsite Rotation Advanced Recovery Replication to Second Site Two Different Disciplines & Technologies to Deal with SPOFs High Availability In-data-center Application Restart

10 10© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Where is the Technology Going? Continuous Availability Application continues without disruption (0-Downtime) Convergence Traditional Disaster Recovery Tape Backup and Offsite Rotation High Availability In-data-center Application Restart Advanced Recovery Replication to Second Site

11 11© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. The Journey to Continuous Availability Continuous Availability Application continues without disruption (0-Downtime) Convergence One Common Discipline & Set of Technologies to Deal with SPOFs

12 12© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Why Make the Journey? Single availability solution: +Eliminate downtime for multiple scenarios +Eliminate idle assets +Reduce the costs of DR/HA testing Make Verification/Auditing easy Potential 28-50% Reduction in Compute Cost …

13 13© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Site ASite B Distribution Layer Presentation Layer Application Layer DB / File Layer Storage Layer Layer-2 Adjacency DCI Distributed Virtual Volume Continuous Availability Characteristics 1.Two-site Parallel TransactionProcessing Architecture 1.Two-site Parallel Transaction Processing Architecture Off-the-Shelf Technology Non-invasive application adaptation 2.Continuous Availability (CA) 2.Continuous Availability (CA) Service Level Always-On App or Service always available inat least one site App or Service always available in at least one site Able to sustain all single failuresincluding site loss Able to sustain all single failures including site loss Transactions automatically re-routed Transactions automatically re- routed 3.CA Apps maintained with littleto no minimal disruption 3.CA Apps maintained with little to no minimal disruption Transactions Redirect on Site Failure Transactions Flow to Either Site

14 14© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Availability Architecture Transformation UseProduction5x9s HATier-1 DRTotal Over-Provision △ △ 120% △ 200% +=+ Site ASite B EMC CA (Fractional Provisioning) += DR 100% Svr 300% DB Cluster + Svr 100% HA+1 100% Traditional Tier-1 DB ++= Svr 100% HA+.2 20% DR 100% Svr 220% Traditional Tier-1 Web Reducing the Cost Curve by Putting Idle Assets to Use

15 15© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Fractional Compute Model Concepts  Provision each site with average compute – Presumption; most servers are modeled to run at 55% - 70% – Headroom is used for peaking  Aggregate in pool provides: need, peaking, and loss protection (traditional HA and DR)  Fractional Computing Math: Traditional Allocation Need5 HA1 DR5 Total11 60% Fractional Allocation Need = 5 Site-A 60%.6 * 5 = 3 Site-B 60%.6 * 5 = 3 Total = 6 Savings11 – 6 = 5 80% Fractional Allocation Need = 5 Site-A 80%.8 * 5 = 4 Site-B 80%.8 * 5 = 4 Total = 8 Savings11 – 8 = 3

16 16© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Production/HA & DR Assuming Internal Recovery Fractional Compute Provision v. Traditional DR AvailabilityTier-1Tier-2Tier-3 Service LevelActive/Fail-OverActive/RepurposeActive/Recover Typical ProvisioningActive/Idle Standby Active/Reuse Dev/Test Shared Risk Provider RTO RPO minutes 0 hours 0 days 24-48h 0000 CA-2SiteHA Full CA CA & 2SHA All 2SHA Traditional 300% 200% 100% CPU Tier-0 Active/Active Active with spares

17 17© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Site Loss – DR v CA Alternative Disaster Recovery: a.Evaluation ▪Outage/ Disaster extent / estimate of duration of outage b.Make decision to fail-over; i.e. declare a disaster c.Invoke BC process d.Initiate fail-over process; push the “big red buttons” e.Handle outage calls f.Figure out how to come home Continuous Availability : a.Immediately have average compute available – do nothing b.Evaluation ▪Outage / Disaster extent / estimate of duration of outage c.Triage ▪Determine any workloads to defer ▪Take down low use/low priority apps / reallocate virtual CPU d.Open load balancer when site back online Which scenario would you rather deal with?

18 18© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.  Save CAPEX –Fewer Servers –Less Storage (Fewer Copies)  Save OPEX –Tech Refresh Seldom Requires Outage –Impact From Test –Headcount/Labor, Licenses, Space / Power / Cooling, Maintenance and Patches… Why Take The Journey to CA?

19 19© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. A Model for Continuous Availability 1.Stretch Farms and Clustersbetween sites 1.Stretch Farms and Clusters between sites 2.Stretch an A/A DB with a lockingmechanism between sites 2.Stretch an A/A DB with a locking mechanism between sites 3.Add SAN storage 4.Add Networking a.Upgrade Local Load Balancing toGlobal a.Upgrade Local Load Balancing to Global b.Data Center Interconnect (DCI) c.Spanned VLAN (VPLS/OTV) d.WAN Connections 5.Add Data Coherency Mechanism(e.g. EMC VPLEX) 5.Add Data Coherency Mechanism (e.g. EMC VPLEX) The Application now is abstracted andspanned between sites The Application now is abstracted and spanned between sites Site ASite B Distribution Layer Presentation Layer Application Layer DB / File Layer Storage Layer Layer-2 Adjacency DCI VPLEX Distributed Virtual Volume

20 20© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. CA at the Presentation and App Logic Layer (Static) CA at the DB and File System Layers CA at the Storage Layer Different Layers Can Be Independent VPLEX WITNESS CA at the Distribution Layer

21 21© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. What if Existing Sites Exceed Metro* Distance? Options: – Create a small presence at a CoLo within metro distance for one leg – Establish the two sides in an existing data center by creating independent pods – Establish two sides in buildings on a campus ▪ Added value: Vmware FT – no inflight transaction loss The Metro Distance Requirement is 5ms RTT, or roughly 60 miles or 100km.

22 22© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. What About Metro Distance Limits? Earthquake and Hurricane Considerations Historically, the major impact span of US continental earthquakes has been under 43 miles Nearly all US Coastal areas are susceptible to Hurricanes; but the impact dissipates as it comes inland USGS Earthquake Map Red Span 0 – 69KM Green Span KM

23 23© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. What About Metro Distance Limits?

24 24© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Site C (out-of-region) Development Anchor Test/QA RPA Replication Network 2N+1 solution deployed out-of-region SRM deployed to automate fail-over Maximum disaster radius for last 100 yrs. has been ~25 miles (40km) What About Metro Distance Limits? VPLEX WITNESS

25 25© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. And Use Geographically Dispersed Pods to Backup Each Other Or Break Processing Down Between Pods

26 26© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Leveraging CA Constructs to Reduce Outages  Take a site offline for maintenance  Take an app offline in a site for rolling maintenance  Encapsulate site configuration  Encapsulate human errors  Data Warehouse Loads/Extracts Scheduled Outages Un-Scheduled Outages

27 27© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Availability Testing In Lieu of DR Testing 1.Take App Down in Site-A App Continues to run in Site-B 2.Trace a transaction thruSite-B 2.Trace a transaction thru Site-B 3.Bring App Up in Site-A Trace a transaction thruSite-A Trace a transaction thru Site-A Fed Requirement: Regular DR Testing or Use Capability Regularly

28 28© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Studied 4 applications with various recovery requirements Current recovery uses repurposed QA systems – Current state has 73 servers (Need-60, HA-13, DR-Dedicated-0) – DB Replication, file systems not protected Requirements – Improve recovery & availability posture – DR solution needs to be scalable Case Study – Power & Gas Utility Traditional DR Solution (replication & standby equipment): – Need-56, HA-22, DR-56 = Total 132 Servers Converged Prod/HA/DR Solution: – Site-A 44, Site-B 44 = Total 88 Servers Solution Options Benefits Reduce Server Count by 33% Improved Availability Posture $3.1M Cost Avoidance How Continuous Availability Reduces Costs & Required Resources Current State & Requirements Traditional Prod/HA/DR vs. CA

29 29© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. SAP ERP & Critical IT has 352 servers – Need-173, HA-57, DR-122 = 203% of need – RTO < 24 hrs, RPO < 5 min, SLA 3x9’s Concerns: – DR plan in place, but no coming home plan – Failover of top DR tiers strands other apps – Idle and out-of-sync assets Case Study – Global Life Sciences Firm Converged HA & DR Architectures – VPLEX / RAC / OTV / vSphere MSC SAP stays up regardless of failure scenario – Most App Transactions under CA – Low use Apps deployed as 2-Site HA Improved confidence in availability Continuous Availability Solution Benefits Reduced Server Count by 29% Reduced Cost $18M over 3 years Eliminate RPO & RTO Eliminate Idle Assets, DR & Fail-Over Time How CA Improved Availability, Eliminated DR, & Reduced Cost Issues Traditional Prod/HA/DR vs. CA

30 30© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Forrester Consulting Study Results* Active-Active Data Centers Provide Operational And Financial Benefits  Unite HA and DR into a single approach –89% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed  Leverage off-the shelf technology –69% of organizations agreed or strongly agreed  Reduce DR capital expenditures –67% of organizations agreed or strongly agreed that they were able to reduce capital expenditures by combining HA and DR.  Reduce the downtime for all IT services & applications –86% of organizations agreed or strongly agreed that AA DC reduced downtime for all IT services and apps. *Question Details In Appendix

31 31© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Assured Availability Services Continuous Availability Back-up and Recovery Disaster Recovery Managed Availability Advisory Service Implementation Service Management Service Readiness Service Back-up and Recovery Disaster Recovery

32 32© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Summary Continuous Availability Technologies can:  Increase Availability  Reduce: –Cost –Complexity  Can be built with off-the-shelf technology with little to no invasive application changes

33 33© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Summary  Quiz: Can you Find the Arrow in the FedEx Logo? Moral: Sometimes solutions are in front of us and we just can’t see them

34 34© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. What is unique about EMC? We leverage technology to provide certainty in availability.

35

36 36© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. APPENDIX

37 37© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Forrester Consulting Study Results Active-Active Data Centers Provide Operational And Financial Benefits Source: A commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting on behalf of EMC Corporation, January 2013 Full


Download ppt "1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Is it Time to Reassess Your Availability Approach? David Edborg Chief Architect EMCC Assured Availability."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google