Converged infrastructure, Nutanix
Discussion
George111 said:
Fastdruid said:
AClownsPocket said:
Our direction is Hyper-V
Good luck!
Fastdruid said:
George111 said:
Fastdruid said:
AClownsPocket said:
Our direction is Hyper-V
Good luck!
AClownsPocket said:
Well after the POC, it didn't solve any of them unfortunately, it didn't fit our requirements.
I'm still not clear what the requirement actually is though?Talk to any VAR and they'll be rubbing their hands when you suggest you want to buy a £100k worth of HCI rather than £30-40K of traditional tin, but what is it you're doing that justifies the potentially massive premium of something like Nutanix or Simplivity?
I get what makes HCI attractive, but something has to make the traditional options unattractive IYSWIM.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I'm still not clear what the requirement actually is though?
Talk to any VAR and they'll be rubbing their hands when you suggest you want to buy a £100k worth of HCI rather than £30-40K of traditional tin, but what is it you're doing that justifies the potentially massive premium of something like Nutanix or Simplivity?
I get what makes HCI attractive, but something has to make the traditional options unattractive IYSWIM.
I get your point, I can't put our requirements on a public forum though. Needless to say, its not just the hardware, there is another compelling reason for us that makes HCI attractive, and based on the quotes we've had so far, it comes in less than doing a traditional like for like replacement. One of the vendors is doing something very interesting that potentially allows us to realise another 100K of savings in networking. Talk to any VAR and they'll be rubbing their hands when you suggest you want to buy a £100k worth of HCI rather than £30-40K of traditional tin, but what is it you're doing that justifies the potentially massive premium of something like Nutanix or Simplivity?
I get what makes HCI attractive, but something has to make the traditional options unattractive IYSWIM.
AClownsPocket said:
I get your point, I can't put our requirements on a public forum though. Needless to say, its not just the hardware, there is another compelling reason for us that makes HCI attractive, and based on the quotes we've had so far, it comes in less than doing a traditional like for like replacement. One of the vendors is doing something very interesting that potentially allows us to realise another 100K of savings in networking.
Am struggling to think of a requirement that something like Nutanix could resolve that would be so super secret 
It does sound a little like a solution looking for a problem. Though as you've now done a PoC and ruled it out I guess not.
I've worked at two banks where they let "new shiny" get in the way of common sense and ended up with 7 figure sums of white elephant platform sat doing nowt because they weren't really clear on what it was they needed to achieve.
I'm also old enough to be really, really cynical when platform manufacturers reckon they've come up with something new and revolutionary
Murph7355 said:
Am struggling to think of a requirement that something like Nutanix could resolve that would be so super secret
It does sound a little like a solution looking for a problem. Though as you've now done a PoC and ruled it out I guess not.
I've worked at two banks where they let "new shiny" get in the way of common sense and ended up with 7 figure sums of white elephant platform sat doing nowt because they weren't really clear on what it was they needed to achieve.
I'm also old enough to be really, really cynical when platform manufacturers reckon they've come up with something new and revolutionary
It really isn't top secret, but my company has a very strict policy on things like this and I'd rather not put myself in a position of wondering if my job's safe It does sound a little like a solution looking for a problem. Though as you've now done a PoC and ruled it out I guess not.
I've worked at two banks where they let "new shiny" get in the way of common sense and ended up with 7 figure sums of white elephant platform sat doing nowt because they weren't really clear on what it was they needed to achieve.
I'm also old enough to be really, really cynical when platform manufacturers reckon they've come up with something new and revolutionary
I really did look around at technologies, but HCI actually met a set of criteria I was given. What I am doing now is working out the best platform for what we want to achieve (I know our requirements). So far HyperGrid have met these in spades, Simplivity is running a good second.
What I can feedback is that we considered,
HP (too much of an amalgamation of old tech with a shiny new management layer). It was more complex than it needed to be and it put me off. On the plus side, the Flexcap offering would have been a boon for us, but it was no good with tech that didn't work.
Nutanix, principles were good. But I found some of the underlying architecture a bit limiting around the storage controller VM's and the software console was over complex for what we need. I also did not feel their customer service was that good. Thats not to say it isn't, but the initial meetings and subsequent communication was not the best and didn't give me the warm feeling I was looking for
. Their support offering was top notch and the call home function was a great selling point for how we envisage using HCI and where.I've been looking at this for a while so I have a pretty good handle on the tech. I know the majority is SuperMicro x86 hardware and the value is in the software, so this is what I'm concentrating on.
AClownsPocket said:
but HCI actually met a set of criteria I was given.
The main point of HCI, the C, is that hardware converges, so you need to be using commodity servers as you were previously for the hypervisor element and then loading them with the storage and networking. With VMware that means vSAN and NSX with commodity switches. I've no idea how Microsoft achieve this with Hyper-V.For example one client has gone from Dell servers, brocade storage switches, Cisco network switches and 2 x HP SAN, each with their own management and support requirements, to a set of HP servers with ESX, vSAN, NSX and 10G switches. The storage is held within each of the hosts and vSAN effectively stripes the data across hosts so you have RAID across the network. Very effective and very fast.
If you start adding in Nutanix or any other propriety hardware or software that isn't part of the hypervisor, you are gradually unwinding the HCI concept and going back to the traditional approach of separate components linked by string which is where the complexity and risk creeps back in.
Caveat . . . HCI is not appropriate for all scenarios etc etc . . . ymmv
George111 said:
The main point of HCI, the C, is that hardware converges, so you need to be using commodity servers as you were previously for the hypervisor element and then loading them with the storage and networking. With VMware that means vSAN and NSX with commodity switches. I've no idea how Microsoft achieve this with Hyper-V.
For example one client has gone from Dell servers, brocade storage switches, Cisco network switches and 2 x HP SAN, each with their own management and support requirements, to a set of HP servers with ESX, vSAN, NSX and 10G switches. The storage is held within each of the hosts and vSAN effectively stripes the data across hosts so you have RAID across the network. Very effective and very fast.
If you start adding in Nutanix or any other propriety hardware or software that isn't part of the hypervisor, you are gradually unwinding the HCI concept and going back to the traditional approach of separate components linked by string which is where the complexity and risk creeps back in.
Caveat . . . HCI is not appropriate for all scenarios etc etc . . . ymmv
AIUI, Nutanix don't use proprietary hardware, a lot of the HCI vendors don't. The proprietary aspect is in the software. Or am I misreading the whole concept?For example one client has gone from Dell servers, brocade storage switches, Cisco network switches and 2 x HP SAN, each with their own management and support requirements, to a set of HP servers with ESX, vSAN, NSX and 10G switches. The storage is held within each of the hosts and vSAN effectively stripes the data across hosts so you have RAID across the network. Very effective and very fast.
If you start adding in Nutanix or any other propriety hardware or software that isn't part of the hypervisor, you are gradually unwinding the HCI concept and going back to the traditional approach of separate components linked by string which is where the complexity and risk creeps back in.
Caveat . . . HCI is not appropriate for all scenarios etc etc . . . ymmv
AClownsPocket said:
AIUI, Nutanix don't use proprietary hardware, a lot of the HCI vendors don't. The proprietary aspect is in the software. Or am I misreading the whole concept?
Simplivity do, they have an FPGA card, but far as I'm aware everyone else it's all in the software (which is why I found it very hard to reconcile paying £30k for £8k worth of Dell PowerEdge).ging84 said:
how can you be allowed to broadcast who you're buying hardware from, and what software you're using, but it won't be worth the risk to you job discussing even in generic terms a situation where that hardware is supposedly the best solution.
I haven't, I've named vendors we are in discussions with and the software direction we are going.I may well be allowed to say more, but I don't have confirmation and its not worth the risk. I just provided an update. I don't really want to get into an argument about what I can and can't say. I'm just curious about other peoples experiences with HCI.
AClownsPocket said:
George111 said:
The main point of HCI, the C, is that hardware converges, so you need to be using commodity servers as you were previously for the hypervisor element and then loading them with the storage and networking. With VMware that means vSAN and NSX with commodity switches. I've no idea how Microsoft achieve this with Hyper-V.
For example one client has gone from Dell servers, brocade storage switches, Cisco network switches and 2 x HP SAN, each with their own management and support requirements, to a set of HP servers with ESX, vSAN, NSX and 10G switches. The storage is held within each of the hosts and vSAN effectively stripes the data across hosts so you have RAID across the network. Very effective and very fast.
If you start adding in Nutanix or any other propriety hardware or software that isn't part of the hypervisor, you are gradually unwinding the HCI concept and going back to the traditional approach of separate components linked by string which is where the complexity and risk creeps back in.
Caveat . . . HCI is not appropriate for all scenarios etc etc . . . ymmv
AIUI, Nutanix don't use proprietary hardware, a lot of the HCI vendors don't. The proprietary aspect is in the software. Or am I misreading the whole concept?For example one client has gone from Dell servers, brocade storage switches, Cisco network switches and 2 x HP SAN, each with their own management and support requirements, to a set of HP servers with ESX, vSAN, NSX and 10G switches. The storage is held within each of the hosts and vSAN effectively stripes the data across hosts so you have RAID across the network. Very effective and very fast.
If you start adding in Nutanix or any other propriety hardware or software that isn't part of the hypervisor, you are gradually unwinding the HCI concept and going back to the traditional approach of separate components linked by string which is where the complexity and risk creeps back in.
Caveat . . . HCI is not appropriate for all scenarios etc etc . . . ymmv
AClownsPocket said:
As I understand it, you can either buy direct from the vendor or they have agreements with certain vendors from whom you can buy reference hardware that has been certified to work with the software. From several conversations I've had, this is usually DELL, Cisco and Lenovo.
So why does it cost so much given you still need VMware/Microsoft Hyper-V licensing anyway ? The software and support offerings I would say. It would always be cheaper to buy it from a reference provider than direct from the vendor anyway. Have to say, I haven't found the pricing to be too bad compared to separate solutions. Guess our procurement department know how to haggle
AClownsPocket said:
The software and support offerings I would say. It would always be cheaper to buy it from a reference provider than direct from the vendor anyway. Have to say, I haven't found the pricing to be too bad compared to separate solutions. Guess our procurement department know how to haggle
"one throat to choke".... 
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff