vSphere 5 Announced

Discussion in 'Business & Enterprise Computing' started by Simwah, Jul 13, 2011.

  1. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,168
    Location:
    Brisbane
    From here on out, I shall refer to "The Cloud" as "Mainframes in Space!" (complete with long echo).
     
  2. bards1888

    bards1888 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Free ESXi 5 only allows 8GB RAM per *HOST*

    As per subject;

    Aaaaaaaaaaaaa
     
  3. The_Derro

    The_Derro Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2001
    Messages:
    547
    Location:
    Sydney
    God this makes me glad I don't deal with licensing!!

    This could be a very spectatular own goal for VMware, especially if MS can get their act together with the next Hyper-V release..
     
  4. aussierob

    aussierob Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2003
    Messages:
    316
    Location:
    HTTP Error 418
    It's a bastardly cash grab! The only reason vmware is getting a good run at my work is the way it gets so much more out of the hardware than standalone servers (chiefly through memory sharing) for a reasonable price.
    We're going to be staying on 4.1 for a looooong time
     
  5. sponks

    sponks Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    56
    I was under the impression the amount of vRAM required is not based on how much RAM is installed in the hosts, but how much is being allocated to VMs.
     
  6. bards1888

    bards1888 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Correct. But who buys loads of RAM and doesn't use it ?
     
  7. Schnooper

    Schnooper Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    796
    I think for a lot of VMware customers it isn’t going to present a massive issue.

    The customers that are going to get hit hard are the big scale up shops, 4 proc hosts with 512GB. If they are allocation pretty much all the memory from the host (and then some) on enterprise plus (which they would be running) that could mean around 10-12 licenses per hosts :shock:

    However the guys that run scale out, for example 2 proc 96GB would not change the licensing cost at all. Again enterprise plus.

    Not sure about the small deployments, what kinda host config are you guys using out there?

    Of course its going to really depend on how the vRAM allocation is done. I think that we will find some more sensible decision on the amount of RAM allocated to VMs, and admins thinking more about what is allocated per VM and what it actually needs. Not based on a company standard. Kinda reminds me of the allocation of vCPU debate :D Assign what is needed, not 4 vCPU as default, cause the app guys says it needs a quad core cpu.
     
  8. newgen

    newgen Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    554
    Location:
    Sydney
  9. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,168
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I'm sure Citrix and Red Hat are both loving it too.
     
  10. Nikoy

    Nikoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,972
    Location:
    Perth WA
    I currently have 3 vmware hosts on 4.0 which are 64GB ram 2 proc running enterprise plus.

    I have sitting here for deployment latter this year replacement boxes running 2 proc and 128 gb of ram i feel that we are going to get fucked if we now want to put vsphere 5 on it.
     
  11. Schnooper

    Schnooper Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    796
    I dont think that you will get fucked by the new licensing. You are replacing the old servers with new, you are only going to have 2 hosts. Both of those boxes have 128GB of RAM. So to allow for failover with HA, you shouldnt be running those boxes above about 60% RAM usage (N+1). So per host, you should be at around 76GB of allocated RAM. This will be below the 96GB (2x48GB per enterprise plus license) per host. So the licensing should be the same, 4 proc of enterprise plus. In theory, you should be able to run upto around 75% of the memory allocation of those server before having a license issue. And thats assuming that allocated vRAM is 1:1 with host RAM.
     
  12. Nikoy

    Nikoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,972
    Location:
    Perth WA
    Good point.

    Ram is allocated as 1:1 performance is more important than price.
     
  13. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,168
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Got a funny email from a mate of mine working for a very large media org. They're baulking at the new licensing regime, and this quote is making it's way around internally:
    It's certainly a hot topic right now. I've never seen this sort of reaction to new licensing before this close to a new product announcement!
     
  14. scrantic

    scrantic Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,767
    Location:
    3350
    While that may be the case don't all run N+1.
     
  15. Schnooper

    Schnooper Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    796
    Thats very true. However, I think that the percentage of shops that dont run in N+1 would be very small.

    In some configs, like scale up with lots of memory are going to be most effected. And there pain is going to be huge.
     
  16. Schnooper

    Schnooper Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    796
    The other thing is guys, that the allocated vRAM is pooled across all licensed hosts, and not per host.

    Taken from http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vsphere_pricing.pdf

    That may help, or maybe hinder the license model for some customers. And just goes to show that correct vRAM allocation is critical for VMs.
     
  17. j3ll0

    j3ll0 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    4,794
    That's a'cos you hasn't been properly educated yet.

    :thumbup:

    .
     
  18. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,168
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Ah, I see. Clearly I'm too stupid, and VMWare needs to teach me how to be a better customer.

    It's all so clear now. :lol:
     
  19. Chemix

    Chemix Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2002
    Messages:
    348
    Location:
    17/F/bandcamp
    This is a load of cock, we got a lot of farms and the N+1 only incrementaly makes it less exhoribitant. With memory ballooning and vmware figuring out that hosts aren't typically cpu intensive (they changed the licensing model as a knee jerk reaction when cpus started getting more cores on them) and memory is where it is at and they can make more money by charging by vRAM.

    Edit: I wouldnt be so annoyed if you got alot more vRAM per license.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2011
  20. Squeezer

    Squeezer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2002
    Messages:
    6,869
    Location:
    Adelaide
    VMware licensing is one thing. What Microsoft and other vendors choose to do with application / OS licensing is another all together
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: