It has been a little while since I shared some thoughts about moving from RISC due to a 3 month assignment managing the Nehalem-EX product line. One word describes that product, ‘wow’, and the change it will bring to the IT marketplace as we know it. But I’m not here to talk about that….

David Bowie was certainly introspective when he wrote his “Changes” song about his need to constantly look at oneself, previous decisions and the need for frequent reinvention and change. The sentiments reflected within “Changes” can be applied to all aspects of life both personal and business. Reflecting on previous business decisions and looking for newer and better ways to do things should not be seen as the previous decision being wrong, but rather should be rewarded as looking to change and do things better based upon the environment today.

Previous business decisions to deploy your IT solutions on RISC based architectures was most likely the right decision at the time based on the business need, the solutions availability and the architecture available to run that solution.  Some of these solutions are likely due for an upgrade due to changing business needs, a better version of the application now being available or have become to expensive to maintain and support on older server system. It is time to make a change and change is likely to include upgrading to next generation of software solution and choosing a new server system that will perform and work with the software solution.

With the rapid pace of technology innovation and evolution over the last number of years, the decision is not necessarily as clear cut as it may have been in the past.

What I wanted to share with you was some information around how Intel’s Xeon microprocessor has evolved and can now compete with the POWER architecture offered from IBM.  Some of you may say that this is not possible, but Xeon 5500 is getting some attention as shown with information posted on IBM website

Price/performance is a key consideration for database workloads and $ / tpmC is pretty widely accepted as a good rule of thumb. Its good to see that the IBM System x3950M2 (based on the Xeon 7400 processor) has a $1.99 $ / tpmC compared to IBM Power P570  $3.54 $ / tpmC;-)

Xeon 5500 has a performance per socket leadership against a similar class POWER 6 2S system. This can be seen by comparing results at www.spec.orgfor benchmarks such as SPECJbb2005, SPECint-rate 2006 etc. IBM makes reference to performance per core leadership over the Xeon 5500. A fair statement, but most customers look at overall system level performance to do the require task. I guess my key takeaway is that if you are looking for a solution to run infrastructure type workloads and get the best bang for your buck then the Xeon 5500 delivers best price/performance

There is also some interesting discussion around scalability of Xeon Vs POWER6. Xeon 5500 is used in 2 socket configurations, and not in scalable systems. So it seems to be a little like comparing apples to oranges!. Scalable Xeon platforms are available in the market today from both IBM and Unisys. There are also 15+ designs for scalable platforms from 8 OEMs coming with Intel’s next generation scalable Xeon product, Nehalem-EX.  Some good material was shared recently at Intel’s Developer Forum in San Francisco. Look for Mission Critical Server Deployment class at https://intel.wingateweb.com/us09/scheduler/catalog/catalog.jspThis material provides a good overview about how Nehalem-EX provides supportfor high-end computing with a scalable micro architecture, advanced RAS capabilities and how Redhat will support Nehalem-EX scalability. This presentation also shows an example of the innovation of NEC who are developing mission critical Linux solutions based on NEC’s Scalable architecture using Intel Xeon processors.

So is it the time for you to change?. Are existing options like the Xeon 5500 or the Xeon 7400 the right choice for you? Nehalem-EX is coming and I believe will bring a huge change to the marketplace as we know it today.

What do you think?

Steve Phillips with Cisco gives us a tour of "The Datacenter of the Future". Check out this short video:

What does your Datacenter of the Future look like? How can Intel and Cisco help?

This past April, as Intel was releasing their new Xeon E5500 series processors, we showed you some remarkable test results demonstrating a solid 53% performance improvement between E5400 and E5500 based servers when running a DBHammer SQL Server 2008 workload http://community.citrix.com/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=73564465. We now wanted to move onto a workload that represents the largest segment of the Citrix user community, XenApp. More specifically, XenApp 5.0 virtualized with the new XenServer 5.5. As we've seen in previous similar virtualization performance tests with XenApp on XenServer, when the XenApp guests are 32 bit (the majority of XenApp users still use use 32-bit applications), the opportunity for server consolidation can be significant. We wanted to see just how good the server consolidation opportunity is when an Intel Xeon E5500-based server is used as a XenServer host. In this case, we looked at how the server consolidation might look when going from 2.93 GHz Xeon X7350 physical XenApp servers to 2.93 GHz Xeon E5570 XenServer hosts.

For the purpose of this test, we ran the physical XenApp server with a single 32-bit workload (Windows 2003 SP2 with MS Office). It was given 2 CPUs and 4GB RAM, typical for this XenApp server workload. Using EdgeSight for Load Test (ESLT) version 3.5 we established a baseline of 25 seconds for users to login, run a standard MSOffice task script, and then logout (including network connect time). We added users until the threshold to run this sequence reached a latency of 30%, at which point the server was deemed to be at capacity. Using this configuration and test program, the maximum number of users was 47. This was a relatively small, single physical XenApp server, so 47 concurrent users was considered respectable.

Since we were testing with a Xeon E5570 server with dual quad core CPUs and 32 GB of RAM, we wanted to see how many users we could get onto a single host using multiple XenApp VMs, each with the same resource configuration as we used in the physical server test. We built 2 vCPU, 3.5 GB RAM XenApp virtual servers on the E5570 and ran two tests using the same ESLT workload. The difference between the 4 GB of RAM used in the physical server test and 3.5 in the virtual server test is due to the need for memory overhead when running multiple VMs. In the XenServer setup screen, we selected the option of running XenApp which automatically configured the VMs with the appropriate amount of shadow memory for XenApp workloads.

We also wanted to see the impact of hyperthreading to VM density per host as well as the number of concurrent users per VM. Intel describes hyperthreading as “delivering thread-level parallelism on each processor resulting in more efficient use of processor resources, higher processing throughput and improved performance.” It would be interesting to see how many more concurrent XenApp users we could get with an upgrade to the E5570 and by virtualizing with XenServer 5.5 and then see how many more users we might get once hyperthreading was enabled. Would hyperthreading allow us to run twice as many VMs on a single host? To find out, we ran our first virtualized XenApp test with hyperthreading activated and then repeated the test again with it turned off. With hyperthreading, the first thing we noticed was that even though there were only 8 CPU cores on the E5570 host server, XenServer was able to see 16 vCPU cores as resources available to be assigned to VMs. As a result, we were able to successfully run a maximum of eight VMs, each with the necessary 2 vCPU cores, generating an average of 69.25 users per VM for a total of 554 users.

When we ran the second test, this time with hyperthreading turned off, and noticed that the number of users per VM increased slightly to 88. However, the maximum number of VMs was now only four, due to the fact that we now only had 8 vCPU cores to work with. As a result, the total number of users for the host was now only 352.

In the end, we discovered that while hyperthreading doubled the number of assignable vCPU resources, it didn’t directly translate to a 2:1 increase in the number of users per VM. That’s a reasonable trade-off, since hyperthreading effectively doubled the number of VMs that we could create with the same number of CPU cores. So, while were able to generate 6.5x the number of concurrent XenApp users onto a single Xeon E5570 host server without hyperthreading as compared to a single X7350 physical XenApp test server, the number of concurrent users increased to an incredible 10.8x with hyperthreading. That’s a remarkable server consolidation opportunity for any 32-bit XenApp administrator. And while XenApp will virtualize very nicely with XenServer on that same dual quad core X7350 server, remember that the number of users per VM when using this test schema will be 47. Since hyperthreading isn’t available on the X7350, the maximum number of VMs on the X7350 host would be 4 making the maximum number of concurrent users 188. Not bad, but nowhere near the 544 concurrent users we get on the E5570 with hyperthreading. That’s an increase of 356 users, almost three times the number of concurrent XenApp users.

Pretty hard to ignore.

As we’ve seen here, the promise of Intel’s Nehalem technology is being realized in some very practical ways. As a result, the performance bar for XenApp, when virtualized with XenServer, is now higher than ever.

Today, I came across this website and special offer to become an SAP insider.  While I started looking at some joint papers and technology proof points developed in collaboration between SAP and Intel on the new Nehalem (xeon 5500) products and SAP's latest solutions.  I also found a bunch of information that SAP does in collaboration with many other vendors on technology designed to boost IT value.

Special features included collaboration with Sun, Citrix, RedHat, Novell, VMware

Registration was quick, easy, free and very informative. Highly recommended!

Read How Intel and SAP Deliver Business Value Through Strategic Technology Investments (registration page) and take your first steps to becoming an SAP Insider.

Don't want to register for another site or newsletter ? ... go to http://www.intelalliance.com/SAP/

Chris

Let me start by offering a big thanks to Intel for the invitation to join this group. It's a great opportunity to talk about how Intel’s virtualization technology directly impacts end-users by enabling ISVs like Parallels to deliver exciting new capabilities and solutions.

The most recent example of this impact is Parallels Workstation 4.0 Extreme, available today through HP on the Z800 Workstation. Another milestone in desktop virtualization, Parallels Workstation Extreme is the first virtual workstation solution to enable the direct assignment of graphics and networking hardware resources to a virtual machine. Our underlying Parallels FastLane Architecture makes this possible, utilizing Intel virtualization technology such as Intel VT-x, VT-d, and Extended Page Tables (EPT).

Parallels has long worked with Intel to bring performance and ease of use directly to virtualization users.  For example, Parallels has over two million desktop virtualization users already enjoying the power of Intel VT-x combined with our patented ease of use features such as Coherence and SmartSelect. These types of innovations show why Parallels is focused on working closely with market leaders such as Intel.

Parallels Workstation 4.0 Extreme builds on this well-established path, introducing innovations such as near-native virtualized graphics performance using Intel’s VT-d technology as well as new ease of use innovations such as SmartMouse, allowing users to seamlessly move between multiple operating systems, each on its own display.

Ah, but we're not done yet! There are many more great things to come, and together with strategic partners like Intel, we’ll continue to push the envelope and bring together new innovations in virtualization performance and ease of use to take virtualization to new markets.

How do I migrate my solution from RISC to x86 architecture is one of the questions that I get asked a lot these days. It is a very fair question to ask as it is only human nature to want some level of comfort when planning a transition.

There are multiple different paths available to migrate solutions and there are numerous different variables which need to be considered. There is no 'one-size fits all' approach to migration. Factors such as operating system environment, type of workload, whether packaged application and the level of custom code in your solution all come into play when trying to plan out your migration.

So, without writing 'war and peace' (an extremely long novel) I just wanted to share some perspectives and point to some resources in that jungle of resources that might help you navigate your way through a solution migration

Firstly, if your solution is an off the shelf application then moving it from one architecture type to another is a straight forward  porting and recompile process. Contrary to some popular beliefs there is not a whole separate set of application vendors and titles where the applications just run on Unix/RISC combination. Most application vendors have made their products available on multiple different operating systems that run on multiple different architectures. Unfortunately there is no master index or website out there that I have come across that would simplify the process of seeing who supports what application on what operating and what architecture. (let me know if there is something like this). Unfortunately it is a hard grind and requires a visit to each application vendors website to ensure that their application that is part of your solution is supported on your choice of operating system and your server platform of choice.

Luckily, it is not all doom and gloom and hard work. One very useful site around Solaris is the tool on SUN Microsystems website that allows you to check what applications  run on Solaris sparc or Solaris x86.http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/apps/

The last I checked over 80% of applications that run on SPARC also run on x86.

My suggestion if you draw blank here is to approach your application vendor and make business case on why they should support a Solaris x86 version. Likelihood is that the application vendor has a version running on Linux/x86 already, so getting a version to run on solaris/x86 is not a huge engineering effort. Mainly the application vendor will want to see some real demand so they can justify the support model.

There are also some useful guides out there developed by HP, Dell, Intel, SUN, IBM, Redhat, Microsoft and others that are technically focussed on the 'how to' migrate your solution.

Here is just a sample of some of the resources.

• HP www.hp.com/go/sun2hp. Not only does this site have material on SPARC, also contains material on AS400, POWER, Mainframe and other architectures. There is a wealth of information on all the HP options from Itanium to Xeon, Solaris, Linux, windows, HP-UX etc. Technical guides, TCO tools, migration resources etc
  another site that focus on providing migration assistance is www.hp.com/go/migration
• Dell http://www.dell.com/unixmigration. Don't get thrown by the title of the link. Some good content here on how to move an Oracle database and DNS server to Solaris or Linux on Dell system. Also content on why to move and how to get some support
• SUN http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/howtoguides/installationhowto.jsp How to install Solaris 10 on x86.
• Redhat http://www.redhat.com/intelligence/. This site has whitepapers, migration guides, webinars, how Linux compares to unix etc

Lastly migrating custom code is a more challenging project. There are many organizations with significant experience and expertise that offer services to assist in migration projects. Leverage these organizations to help. I know at first blush there may be concerns of the cost of paying for migration services, but look at the bigger picture. In a lot of cases the TCO benefits and improved performance will deliver business benefits that will outweigh the cost of migration in the long run.

Hopefully this is helpful. I would really like to hear what have your experiences have been with migration or what are the challenges that you face as you look forward towards migration?

Today's video blog features Massimo Re Ferre', IBM Senior IT Architect, giving a chalk talk on some of the scenarios where you are looking to "Scale Up" or "Scale Out" your virtual infrastructure. Check out this short video from VMWorld Europe 2009:

Powerful Technology. Compelling Savings. Competitive Business.

Sharing others success is always really cool.  Here are my Top 10 success stories captured off of the intel customer references page located at www.intel.com/references.   These leading IT shops from around the world have successfully taken advantage of new technology to transform their business .. saving money, boosting performance, driving productivity, and increased competitiveness into their business.

Did I miss your favorite? Want to nominate one for my Q2 list? …or , just tell me your story – love to hear it

Chris

1.        Station Casinos virtualizes IT: To help control IT costs and ensure a robust customer experience, the IT group virtualized its infrastructure by running VMware* virtualization software on Dell PowerEdge* servers equipped with the Intel® Xeon® processor 5100 and 5400 series. So far, the company has eliminated almost 100 physical servers, avoided $190,000 in hardware acquisition costs, and accelerated the deployment of new services from weeks to hours. Virtualization enables Station Casinos to continue to deliver fun and relaxation while keeping the company successful even in tough economic times. http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/StationCasinos.pdf

2.        Thomson Reuters:  With virtualization software running on rack servers based on the Intel Xeon processor 7300 series, the Thomson Reuters IT team is achieving a consolidation ratio of 18:1, reducing power requirements and freeing up space to absorb future growth. “We expect to increase that ratio to 25:1 when we move to the six-core Intel Xeon processor 7400 series in the near future,” says Crowhurst. The company’s power requirements are growing by nearly 20 percent every year as busi­ness expands. By optimizing the power and cooling strategy in its new data center and concentrating more blades in less space, the IT team was able to increase power density from 100 watts per square foot to 150 watts per square foot. As a result, there is less need for new data center construction, greatly reducing future environ­mental impacts. http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Thomson_Reuters.pdf

3.        TRW: Achieved server consolidation ratio of 20:1, Increased CPU utilization from 40% to 85%, Reduced server deployment times from two weeks to one to two days, Cut total annual power and cooling costs by 70% to 80%, Saved 50% in annual datacenter cooling costs in Malaysia alone, Enabled one IT staff member to manage up to 50 servers, Saved 80% on the potential cost of additional UPS systems across the datacenters.http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/TRW_snapshot.pdf

4.        Business & Decision Group: Power consumption was reduced by approximately 30 per cent compared to the previous generation of processors. The pure performance gains and lower energy consumption helps us deliver new solutions for our customers and will lead to a return-on-investment in less than one year. Could gain virtualization rates of 20:1 and with a processor load slightly below 55 percent.  http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Business_and_Decision_All_Systems_Go.pdf

5.        BMW: The Intel® Xeon® processor 7300 series performed 2.75-3X faster than the implemented RISC-based servers. Based on the Intel® Core™ mircoarchitecture, it is manufactured using new materials such as hafnium-based high-k gate dielectrics and metal gates, which significantly reduces electrical leakage. http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/BMW_SAP_casestudy_FV.pdf

6.        Carnegie: Reduces yearly energy costs by approximately SEK I million (USD 167,000) thanks to an estimated 1.1 million KWh annual saving arising from the server consolidation. Carnegie then replaced 100 of its legacy servers with 16 HP ProLiant 380 G5* servers powered by the Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor 5300 series and in the process created approximately 140 virtual servers. Thanks to the reduction in physical servers it also shelved its plans for extra cooling equipment while also making a SEK 10 million (USD 1.7 million) saving by avoiding the need to physically rebuild its data centre. http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Carnegie_final_version.pdf

7.        Kelly Blue Book: Refreshing aging servers with new Dell* servers based on multi-core Intel® Xeon® processors enables Kelley Blue Book to accelerate performance of key applications by up to 50 percent, increasing business agility. Loading and processing business warehouse data was taking 16 to 20 hours each time - now it’s taking half that amount of time. Server consolidation ratios of up to 15 to 1 and reduced energy costs with the new hardware - saving KBB approximately $10,000 each month in power and cooling costs.http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Kelley_Blue_Book_CaseStudy.pdf

8.        PLAY: Processing all of PLAY’s historical roaming mobile transactions for 2008 to make the data available for the Optiprizer windows user application, takes just 44 minutes running on the Intel Xeon processor 5500 series, compared to 102 minutes on the Intel Xeon processor 5400 series. This represents a performance increase of 230 percent. Similarly, complex business intelligence tasks can now be performed twice as quickly. http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/PLAY.pdf

9.        Yahoo:  Upgraded their Mission Critical Oracle database with Intel Xeon 7300 based servers. Yahoo is able to support a 1.4-petabyte database with 16 servers without any additional training or operating costs, while cutting the time to run the most demanding queries by 93% (20 hours to 73 minutes). http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Intel_ESS_Yahoo_7300_Case_Study_HR.pdf

10.     Turtle Entertainment: Europe’s largest online gaming community supports its 875,000 members with Intel Xeon processor 7400 based servers.  Consolidation with larger servers reduces network, power/cooling and space costs and enabled a 35% reduction in TCO while improving their customers gaming experience (time it took to load a web page went from 177 milliseconds to 72 milliseconds). http://www.intel.com/references/pdfs/Turtle_Entertainment_V3.pdf