29. January 2010 · 18 comments · Categories: UCS

Open your eyes to a new approach to IT infrastructure

It seems to come as a shock to people who are new to Cisco UCS to find that it is not just capable of running vSphere.  A UCS blade can run any Intel workload on all the mainstream OS’s – Windows, Linux, Solaris, vSphere, Oracle, SAP etc.  Each of those workloads will require a different OS and application build, different network connections and different storage connections.  Cisco UCS can apply those different builds to the same blade, or any blade, in the system.  This, at last after years of marketing hype from competitors, provides truly agile infrastructure.  But what do I mean, and how does it work?

This post explains how Cisco UCS offers IT infrastructure a new way of working with stateless computing.  You could manage UCS the way you manage any other compute platform with the minimum of change, just like you can drive a Ferrari the same way you’d drive a pick up truck.  But should you?  No, you shouldn’t, you’d be wasting a fantastic opportunity.  So how does UCS change how you drive your infrastructure?

Update: there will be six follow-on posts to provide practical examples of each of the six UCS features – WOW-A, Unified Fabric, Over-commitment, Service Profile, Virtualized CNA and Stateless Computing.

Let’s start with a brief description of four types of workloads and then explain how they can all run on the same blade type without any human having to reconfigure the compute, network or storage.  Imagine a simple, 48GB blade with one CNA connecting to two redundant Unified Fabrics with no internal disk, but access over the fabric to LAN and SAN.  Cisco UCS Service Profiles reconfigure the blade to access the different OS, network and storage connections with one-click.

  • Oracle RAC database.  Needs four ethernet connections for LAN/clustering and two fibre-channel HBAs to access the shared storage on a SAN.  The OS is installed on a boot LUN on the SAN.  Oracle also works very well on Linux and using NFS, and to enable this (instead of FC) through UCS is a simple configuration change to modify the presented ethernet NICs and the appropriate VLANs.
  • IBM Websphere.  The popular Java middleware / application server platform, this is installed on Linux on a boot LUN on the SAN.  It only requires access to two ethernet NICs.
  • Microsoft Windows 2008.  This OS can run any profiles and workloads, be it SQL Server 2008 or Hyper-V.  In this case it requires a couple of trunked vNICs to access the LAN and it also requires a couple of vNICs for DFS access.
  • VMware vSphere 4.  A number of ethernet connections are required for the VM, vMotion and other Nexus 1000V interfaces.  Additionally, storage can be provided via NFS, iSCSI or FC.  The ESX4 installation is on the FC SAN.

These are just four examples and of course you can run many more workloads than these four.  For a list of certified operating systems and enterprise applications, check out Cisco Unified Computing System at Work.

Here’s a simple illustration of these four workloads and how they can all run on the same simple blade hardware.  UCS provides the virtualization of the compute hardware components, plus network (VLANs) and storage (VSANs).

Cisco UCS Workloads

Four very varied workloads requiring quite different OS and app installs and different connections to the LAN and SAN, but all of these workloads can run on the same blade type – but how?  It can only work because of these six UCS capabilities that I help customers exploit every week:

  1. Wire once and walk away architecture
  2. Unified Fabric
  3. Over-commitment instead of Pipe Carving
  4. Service Profile, Pools, Policies and Templates operational capability
  5. Palo MK81KR Converged Network Adapter component
  6. Stateless Computing

Wire Once and Walk Away (or WOW-A!) is about making the physical configuration simple and handling the complexity in logical configurations instead where it’s easier to manipulate.  Gone are the CD installations of software, banished are the complex plethora of physical cables and port connections for all the different LAN and SAN types. Using network and storage virtualization and logical configurations, you can sit at your warm desk drinking your hot coffee and click and drag to modify the virtual LAN and SAN configurations: no cabling changes required.  Data center visits are virtually eliminated.  Different workload, different virtual architecture, same blade.  Simple.

With Unified Fabric you have a drastically reduced amount of physical connections: instead, you run multiple workloads over the same bit of string and separate them using network and storage virtualization.  On one 10GbE pipe you can run IP, NFS, iSCSI, FC.  Remember those “which protocol is best?” arguments: consign them to the bin, you can now run whatever you want over Ethernet.  Just tell a Service Profile what VLAN or VSAN to present to an OS, with a click of the mouse, and you’re done.  No cabling or network card work required.  Different workload, different network connections, same blade.  Simple.

Over-commitment is about reducing admin headaches and increasing ROI.  Instead of making life difficult for the infrastructure team, UCS does not ask you to Pipe Carve: this is the act of putting artificial limits on a network channel, such as carving up a 10GbE into four 2.5GbE channels.  Instead, any workload sharing the same pipe can in theory use all the bandwidth, but in reality and practice – just as we learned over the years with virtualization – that 10GbE bandwidth is enough for everyone.  In the rare cases where the 10GbE is not enough, there are two things that UCS does out of the box.  First, you can easily add more 10GbE pipes into a port channel and make them available to the workloads without a disruptive change.  Second, the system has Class of Service and Quality of Service “knobs” you can turn to influence who gets what bandwidth WHEN AND ONLY WHEN there is contention.  Don’t Pipe Carve, it’s wasteful.  Different workload, different capacity requirements, same blade.  Simple.

Service Profiles are the classic “simple idea, powerful capability”.  Building on the WOW-A approach, your esteemed and highly paid architects create pools and policies and templates that codify the best practices around compute, LAN and SAN configurations.  This means that managing the day-to-day, BAU lifecycle of a workload is made really, really easy.  A Service Profile pulls the configurations it needs from the pools (e.g. what pWWN can I use for my vHBA?), policies (e.g. if I’m running vSphere, I need to enable Cisco Discovery Protocol on my vNIC), and templates (e.g. what should I call my vNICs, and what trunked VLANs should they access?).  You create one Service Profile per workload (e.g. Oracle RAC node), provision the OS onto a boot LUN on the SAN, tell it what vNICs and vHBAs to present and what behaviour to adopt from the pools, policies and templates – and that’s it.  Different workload, different Service Profile, same blade. Simple.

The Palo MK81KR Converged Network Adapter brings virtualization to the network.  This device virtualizes interfaces so it can present the combination of ethernet NICs and FC HBAs that your workload requires.  Need four vNICs and two vHBAs?  Need 2 vNICS and no vHBAs?  Different workload, different network connections, same blade. Simple.

Stateless Computing is about moving the workload bits (OS install, application install) from a disk local to the compute node (internal disks) to a shared storage area that all compute nodes can access so that any compute node can run that workload.  Today this is done on UCS by installing the workload on a boot LUN on the FC SAN.  The Service Profile tells the blade where to boot from.  Different workload, different boot LUN, same blade.  Simple.

Last thought:  Cisco UCS is not about “is this blade better than that blade?”  It’s about doing infrastructure in a different, more fluid, more agile way.  It’s about increasing ROI and reducing complexity, and therefore reducing OpEx.  It’s about making your infrastructure more productive by running more workloads on the same compute nodes.  Imagine from 8am-8pm you run VDI on vSphere, but 8pm-8am you run batch workloads on Oracle: on the same blade, without operator intervention.  That’s what Cisco UCS is about.

Related posts:

  1. Indirection, Abstraction, Pools and Policies – the UCS simple approach
  2. Over-commiting your infrastructure for multi-tenant DR with Cisco UCS
  3. 25 ways that Cisco UCS frees you to do other things

18 Comments

  1. Steve Kaplan says:

    Excellent post Steve. I write and talk extensively about UCS, but didn’t really think about the benefits described in your Last Thought.

  2. Jason says:

    Interesting stuff for sure, however it is not really new. We have been doing this exact same thing for 6 years with Egenera. However it is good to see a major player doing it as well.

  3. Agreed concept is not new but the implementation is. Egenera is different. All competitors are different. When you look at System vs. System you see the true picture. Egenera does not have the vSphere integrations at the ethernet protocol level that Cisco UCS has. That is very, very unique. In fact, your “it’s not really new” comment just shows how little folks appreciate how different UCS is.

  4. Jason says:

    @Steve Chambers

    I agree that while it does not have the vSphere network capabilities, it can switch from one workload to another on different networks, different operating systems, different hypervisors, etc. at any time of the day in a similar fashion that you mention.

    It is wire once as you say. I can have it running a Linux workload at 8am-8pm and switch to a Windows workload at the predefined time on the same blade/server. I can have it change networks and storage dynamically/automatically.

    I can do this with virtual machines as well.

    Now mind you as mentioned I have been using Egenera for a while and we did have a rep come in and work with us on UCS as we were concerned with the Dell/Egenera thing. However in the bake off, there was not enough pros nor was the management as easy as Egenera, despite the clearly aging UI.

    The Egenera setup is less complex and very very powerful. I like UCS and feel in a few years will pass Egenera.

  5. Suman says:

    Excellent overview and value-prop Steve. The 6 UCS capabilities sums it up in terms of value prop and the last thoughts takes it further by talking about ROI and resource utilization.

    Another thing I really like about this whole solution is the simplicity of configuring UCSM – its very intuitive and presents with one tool to do all of the required management and operation(for a very large pool of servers)

  6. Scott Lee says:

    Hi Steve:

    sounds interesting on paper…how much of these stuff are actually used by customers in real life?
    What would be the real barrier of entry to a typical enterprise data center for such technology ? Most data center are not so dynamic…

    Is Palo MK81KR Converged Network Adapter certified by VMware already and how many vNIC/interface can it really carve up in a ESX environment?
    Last i was told by VMware, SR-IOV is still not supported, so how can one carve any amount of vnic as one likes?

  7. Hi Scott, there are published use cases and references on UCS and those customers are doing this stuff for real – although these public references are just the tip of the iceberg, and UCS is being deployed across Enterprises, Service Providers and SMBs. Check the videos and references, esp. at the bottom of this page: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns944/index.html

    The Palo adapter has been developed with VMware :-) it is already certified and is integrated with vCenter – if you make network changes in UCSM for the Palo, the changes are reflected in vCenter.

    Lastly, Palo is not SR-IOV it is a different technology – similar results, but different and we (Cisco) think better than SR-IOV…

    Thanks for your comment! :-)

  8. Scott Lee says:

    @Steve Chambers
    Thanks Steve..

    http://www.vmware.com/go/hcl does not have Palo M81KR..only M71KR adapters..am i searching the wrong adapter?
    BTW, what technology is Palo using if not SR-IOV? most of the papers I read mentioned about network interface virtualization but do not touch on specifics like PCI virtual/physical functions. I thought that is industry standards..

  9. Hey Scott, the M81KR is _just_ coming out, so be patient :-)

    I believe the Cisco tech marketing guys will publish details about the implementation, let me check on that… thanks!

  10. Serverman says:

    This is just a late entry to a commodity area of server compute. While a unique approach this week IBM and HP will not let this bypass their protfolios. With Dell added into the mix how does Cisco think they will provide such a radically different system that people will just flock to their technology. Cisco will gain market share but remain a nitch player. Also you just have to love they will only support their software such as UCM 8.0 on their hardware. Cisco needs to wake up and learn people don’t like to be locked into a hardware flatform because of name when it’s an open system. It’s the old Kingston vs cisco memory argument again.

  11. Things are different, but only if you look beyond the server and commodity pieces. Cisco are the first to say that their blades are commodity using non-proprietary gear across the board except where big differences are made, like extended memory and virtual interface cards. The real benefit is when you focus on the System word, and look at how with UCS there is a seemless transition from virtual machine through UCS and the virtual network (VLAN and VSAN) to users and data. If you are just looking at one blade vs. another, you’re missing the whole argument and will forever be locked into small thinking about Cisco vs. HP vs Dell etc. Peel your nose from the glass, take a few steps and look at the whole window.

  12. Serverman says:

    Fair comments but I always look at the big picture. I see nothing in their technology set that is so unique that we should dump vendors who have been doing this for 8+ years. They will quickly adopt and provide the same extended memory (IBM has been doing this with their 3950 and can get to 1TB of ram if you really need it per 4 CPU system). So again interesting and unique today and commodity tomorrow. As for virtual interfaces you have always been able to mask MAC and LUN IDs across blades so nothing new there. Really it’s just more of the management and ‘pod’ approach. Interesting today and forgotten tomorrow.

  13. You stick to your IBM servers, and I wish you the best of luck :-)

  14. Jon says:

    I am wondering if it is possible to run a different OS / Hypervisor in each socket on a dual socket UCS or new quad socket UCS blades. I have seen mention of dynamic hardware partitioning in a windows server context, but can also envision other scenarios where it may be useful to partition a server, for example to run vmware and hyper-v or multiple independent instances of ESX and so forth. Any thoughts?

  15. No, Jon, the UCS blades are made of industry standard components (apart from the B250 with the Cisco Memory ASIC for 48 DIMMS). This means: one blade, one OS. Majority seem to deploy ESX which of course does give you the opportunity to “partition”.

    When I refer to different workloads I mean over time: ie. VDI from 6am to 10pm, and Hadoop Cluster from 10pm to 6am.

  16. craig says:

    The stateless computing are more than just masking the MAC, LUN or WWN, it does contain UUID, Firmware, BIOS and others information which are require for a system. The MAC and WWN is enough for you to move your system state to another blade, but you will have risk which the others information which are tie to your physical hardware are not transferable

  17. Very true! It takes more than just MAC and WWN :-) The other things I love that Service Profiles will soon define: Power Capping, extra BIOS settings… so much power! ;-)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free