1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

Nutanix

Discussion in 'Business & Enterprise Computing' started by GooSE, Oct 4, 2013.

  1. QuakeDude

    QuakeDude ooooh weeee ooooh

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    8,482
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Employment?

    Not sure who but there are at least two Nutanix employees who are here.. and who are allowed to post as long as the discussion stays grounded, technical and doesn't turn into a sales fest.
     
  2. millennia

    millennia Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2013
    Messages:
    19
    Declaration: I DO NOT work for Nutanix, I am an end user of nearly 4 years and I subscribe to this thread and respond to notifications of comments from an end user point of view. That includes using ESXi and HyperV on the platform as well as Acropolis. It's an opinion based on experience, take it / ignore it as you will.

    ****

    You're not getting software vendor lock in if you can use 4 different hypervisors, are you? At some point something has to be consistent unless you build everything yourself from bits - in this case it's the base platform that delivers HCI - VSAN locks you to VMware, Nutanix doesn't.

    Nutanix have tried to do what they can to give the end user choice, but at the end of the day if you don't like Nutanix then don't use it. I just can't think what is better.

    Having said that I didn't say VMware were rubbish, I said they have a great product, and they are clearly still the hypervisor leader and everybody will continue to play catch up. In the same way though VSAN trails Nutanix as a hyper converged platform, and will continue to trail imho.

    A classic comparison is the 'argument' over performance, with VMware denigrating Nutanix over their use of a VM based controller against their in kernel VSAN code - stating that Nutanix performs poorly because of this.

    This has proven to be bollocks.

    Take a single SQL Server VM with a single attached disk, one on ESXi and one on Acropolis. Even with high performance SSD underneath you will struggle to get more than about 70k IOPS out of that VM - no slacker but no matter what you do you see a topping out of performance.

    At this point you get one of two options thrown at you: increase the number of vdisks to provide more IO paths, which is problematical if the object you want to have the performance on is a single 1TB database, or alternatively throw in the virtualisation towel and go bare metal on NVMe.

    However Nutanix have rearchitected the way they handle IO in Acropolis, and they use a system where IO can utilise separate CPU cores to boost performance to a single vDisk with multiple IO threads. By this method that same single disk VM can achieve in excess of 300K IOPS - no bare metal backout required.

    I must state that in these cases we are talking about performance on a working set size way in excess of any cache present so we can't cheat by sticking data in RAM - this is all about real world possibilities not bullshit benchmarking.

    Another issue, and I'll shut up about it then, honest ;), is the use of RAID today in any storage system when you possibly have 8TB+ HDDs (or even SSDs the way they are going) and the huge time and associated risk posed by rebuilding the RAID set in case of a media failure.

    Nutanix use replication and distributed rebuild to maintain N+1 or N+2 copies of data across the whole cluster, and this is genuinely spread across the cluster and not just replicated to a specific other node as some products are. Because of this the more nodes in the cluster (so more total storage) the faster a rebuild/repair in the case of media (or entire node) failure is.

    Instead of many many hours of rebuild for a RAID array with an 8TB failed drive in it before you are secure again you can be looking at 15 minutes for a disk.

    Also as a personal opinion (oh I didn't shut up, last point, honest) I don't like the VMWare kernel architecture for VSAN because I object to having millions of lines of code in a product for a feature I absolutely don't want to use, with the inevitable (and experienced) issue of bugs appearing in that feature code and requiring patching with a full node reboot. It annoys me, I think VMware is bloatware because of it and becoming unmanageable - with both poor QA and support with less and less deep understanding of issues when things go wrong.

    Nutanix aren't immune from bugs - it's software - but my experiences have been so much better since deciding to make them my core virtualisation platform and I've never looked back.
     
  3. PabloEscobar

    PabloEscobar Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    13,926
    Serious question follows, not an accusation of astro-turfing.

    Out of all the things discussed on OCAU, why is Nutanix the only thing you've ever posted about?

    What is about about Nutanix that seems to inspire you to wax lyrical about it, that no other piece of software, or thing does?

    Nutanix locks you to Nutanix is what I was getting at WRT vendor lock in.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2017
  4. samus

    samus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    Baulkham Hills, Sydney.
    Follow Up

    Thought I would follow this up, since I decided Nut/VSAN/S2D was not a fit for my needs.

    Nut merely locks you in to software rather than hardware, also, the price quoted was for OEM licensing, meaning that if a node dies, I have to buy a new licence, or such is my understanding. Ultimately, it's no different than buying a SAN, and being locked into the vendor either way.

    I did like their interface and management features.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: