The original pair of VBlock’s were purchased to replace a hodgepodge of small VM clusters of 3 to 4 VM hosts and an outdated SAN, in addition to moving from an old data center to a new data center. Moving the VM’s from the old systems to the new VBlock --which had more shared resources and a newer VMware version-- was a big win. Once in place, we virtualized as many servers as could be converted from freestanding servers to a VM. The only exception was when the licensing of an application was cost prohibitive; we keep these on stand-alone hosts. This was mainly due to application licensing bias, rather than limits on virtualization.
Converged Infrastructure OS Reviews
Showing reviews of the top ranking products in Converged Infrastructure, containing the term OS
Vblock [EOL]: OS
The primary use case of this solution is as a virtualization host for everything and anything we can run on it.
Oracle Exalogic [EOL]: OS
The database is the solution's most valuable feature. Running the application on one machine makes it easier to position it to the client. I don't need a separate machine to run my databases. I can virtually run the databases with the application. The Linux component of it is great as well. It makes it easier to administrate. There are a lot more Linux administrators as opposed to the SuperCluster which uses Solaris and there are not as many people that use Solaris.
The automation and provisioning of the environment, as well as the centralized monitoring, have all improved over the years.
Rackspace OpenStack: OS
In the old days, when VMware was not so acceptable in large enterprises, the company offered customers pre-use coupons to replace their machines.
For many large customers, they may or may not trust FlexPod in a sophisticated ecosystem. They still rely on the hardware to provide stability for large enterprises.
We use this primarily for robosites, which means remote offices.
The most valuable feature of this solution is the data services that are available.
Delivery speed and integration speeds have increased. The solution has enabled us to run mission-critical workloads. Our SQL cluster is on there, which is high IOPS.
All-in-one solution is great for when you don't have a lot of staff, with multiple disciplines. It has increased productivity because we only have a staff of four people, so we are able to focus on other items like innovation. It also has simplified our support experience.
FlexPod has also improved applications for us. It handles IOS better.
There's a lot less overhead management. It's a lot easier for developers, in particular, to get the compute and storage they need. They don't have to go through a bunch of change requests. They just do it on demand.
The solution's infrastructure enables us to run demanding, mission-critical workloads. Our entire development organization runs on FlexPod. Their full development environment is on it. So, application development is pretty mission critical to us.
I like FlexPod's granular scalability and broad application support. Our workload isn't that diverse, but I could see other use cases for it.
Flexpod helped us reduce the time required to deploy new applications by about 60%. It's a very dramatic change.
It has also reduced data centered costs. It's hard to quantify, but there's a lot less bare metal that we need. It's all in FlexPod, so maybe a 40% saving. That's a guess, but it's significant.
The solution has also increased static productivity, mainly in that the developers are able to self-serve. They're less dependent on infrastructure resources to stage an environment for them to then start developing on. They can stage their own environments now.
Support is probably the same. It's one area that we didn't see a lot of improvement in and it's actually supporting FlexPod. It's new technology to a lot of our staff, so they're a little uneasy when they're in there messing with UCS's. It's not something a lot of them do all the time. When we do have to, we kind of fumble around the UCS a little bit to figure our way around.
FlexPod does help streamline our IT admin.
We use FlexPod for customer data center solutions — as well as internal solutions in our data center — to host customer data.
The most valuable asset of the product is the use of all-flash storage, low latency I/O (quicker Input / Output).
From a UCS side, it is very simple to go from an ESXi host that is on an M4 blade and switch it out to an M5 blade by changing the service profiles on the blades. It is very easy and quick.
We provide this solution to customers for their data centers, and we also use it internally, for our data center, to host customer data.
This solution is right there in terms of leading-edge digital equipment.
This solution is used mostly for isolated pods for SAP, for instance, or for EPIC.
Private, hybrid and multi-cloud environments are heavily in use by various customers. I would say that hybrid is probably the most common today.
We have integrated with cloud services such as NetApp’s ONTAP, AWS, and Azure.
Our primary use case for this solution is VMware hosting. We use it primarily in the core data center, and that’s where it has worked best for us.
Our applications for payroll, HR, and anything that is mission-critical runs on some form of Flex device. We run a lot of different workloads and a lot of different VMs on this platform.
We are a partner with Cisco, and we assist our customers based on their business requirements.
We have definitely seen an improvement in application performance. They have high availability, and this is what we are looking for. I would say that it is a ninety percent improvement.
Staff productivity has increased because they have more time. The solution provides centralized management, and less time is required for troubleshooting and research. The documentation is in the GUI, embedded within the software. I would say that there is a thirty percent improvement.
Datacenter costs are reduced by means of less power, cooling, and space. I would say it is a fifty percent reduction.
This solution helps our IT administrator to troubleshoot and understand problems.
The most valuable feature is the automation.
FlexPod's ability to manage from edge to core to cloud for supporting modern data and compute requirements is very good.
We have found the solution to be innovative when it comes to computing scores and networking because of the ease of deployment.
It has increased staff productivity and has simplified our support experience. It streamlines our IT admin.
The primary use case for FlexPod is for our websites, intranet, internet, internet facing sites, compute storage, and processing power. We have a NetApp storage device, we have FlexPod, and we have flash storage which is part of the app. It's mostly for internal storage and compute needs.
This solution has given us a great deal of on-site storage that we didn't have before.
The solution’s granular scalability or broad application support helps us meet the needs of diverse workloads.
We have seen an improvement in application performance. Although I don't know what the baseline was so I cannot tell how much it has improved.
It has enabled us to reduce data center costs and to save money.
The most valuable feature of this solution is that there is one call for support.
It is good to have validated designs, so at least supposedly it will work.
The most valuable features of the solution are reliability, scalability, and support.
Having the validated designs helps because it takes the guesswork out of piecing it together.
It works well in private and hybrid environments. Multi-cloud, I have yet to see.
The solution saves us engineering time, which translates to savings in money and it streamlines our IT admin.
Prior to using this solution, we had a legacy VMware environment and there were a lot of problems. Comparing to that time, we can really see the cost benefits of using FlexPod.
The most valuable features of this solution are the scalability, the speed of deployment, and physical server management.
The most valuable features of FlexPod are high availability and scalability.
The most valuable feature is that it is all-in-one, and it is easy to get support on it.
The solution is easily scaled. It is possible to integrate new capabilities and technologies which we have successfully done with no issues. It's a valid, viable model.
The most valuable features of this solution are instant scalability and reliability. The solution has good granularity in terms of network visibility.
The purpose of FlexPod is for a converged infrastructure that provides compute or networking storage and helps launch applications more easily and dynamically.
Over the last year, we've implemented several solutions with FlexPod. We implemented whatever the latest version is. I know we just put one in that was the latest version in a New Jersey school.
Our customers are using on-premise. It's all on premise, but we have implemented solutions that are more hybrid where they are deploying a model where they want their app dev groups to be able to deploy resources much easier to an on-premise infrastructure, as compared to an AWS subscription.
The most valuable feature is the one call number for support and the fact that all the documentation comes with it. They have all of the preprepared plans for the deployment model and we can just choose which one we want for VMware, etc. The hardware is all listed. We buy that and away we go. It's called validated design.
The validated design is nice if we have issues with anything. We can call the vendor, or if anyone says anything, we can say, "Well, we're already running by the certified design to the verify design. We're not doing anything out of the ordinary." It makes support a lot easier.
The solution’s validated designs for major enterprise apps in our organization is very important because of the whole troubleshooting problem, or if we run into any supportability problems. We say, "We've done what was asked of the company. It is all verified. We shouldn't have any funny things happening." As for management, if they come down and ask questions, we can say, "We're following best practices."
The most valuable features are the reliability and tools such as SnapCenter and SnapManager. We use them a lot. They make life easier.
On the surface, validated designs for enterprise apps are not that important but it's knowing that they work, and if they don't work, I can get support for them. We did have some pretty nasty bugs early on, around four years ago, but we haven't had problems.
We have multiple use cases for it. Most of it is just based on the fact of its reliability and its performance. We have customers in the insurance industry, financial industry, retail and they mostly use it for compute and storage.
Our primary use is mostly for footprint consolidation — reducing the number of cables and easing the management model compared to just working with monolithic servers. Having access to the UCSM (Unified Computing System Manager) and managing that way seems to be a lot easier.
Our previous solution used to take 24 hours and now we're down to seven hours. It has really good performance.
It simplifies infrastructure from edge to core but not to the cloud. We have five people running operations and they are quite busy. But for the scale of VMs for the customers, we need to have at least two more men to deal with infrastructure.
We just got AFF so we've got all flash on the environment now. This really speeds things up from something like eight milliseconds for I/O latency to under one millisecond which is great.
FlexPod has definitely made our staff more efficient, enabling them to spend time on tasks. We're going more into automation now and we don't have to build all the VMs by hand. We automate this.
It has also improved application performance by around 50%. We're getting back more scale. I'm very happy with the performance of the database now. It has also decreased our data center's costs. We don't use so many racks anymore. We compressed all the stuff and we have a higher compute and more IOPs in the smaller racks.
The guides that we use to install FlexPods are always up-to-date. This is really helpful, especially if there is a new product with NetApp moving so far forward and Cisco as well. For them to join together and update a centralized document for the install process, it is really good. It helps us understand if there are features from the first version that we installed while upgrading that we need to implement. Those are in the document. So, we find that document useful and helpful when moving forward.
The solution’s validated designs for major enterprise apps in our organization is very important. It helps us to understand what we need to do and deliver, doing it at a supported level for our customers.
It is mostly for small remote sites. The WAN link isn't good enough for them to come to the enterprise site at this time. So, we do a lot of file shares, VMs, etc. It's to run the local business.
Our FlexPods are NetApp FASs, Cisco UCS, and Cisco switches. That's our version of a FlexPod. We call them ROBOs (remote office/branch office). We have about a hundred throughout the world that we deploy in different regions. For us personally, I do the NetApp side of it. We're running NetApp version 9.5P6. That is the lowest version that we run in our ROBO environment.
While the deployment model is on-prem, we are moving to a backup model in the cloud for them for DR. In the next month or two, we are going to start that.
- The compact design
- Cost savings
The solution’s validated designs for major enterprise apps in our organization are very important. We use all certified designs to be eligible for the enterprise support and to receive support promptly. That is why we extremely rely on the certified designs and best practices.
The most valuable feature is the one support. Anytime that a customer buys a solution for a server, storage, or network, once they have trouble in their environment, everyone wants to find out who was wrong. With FlexPod, everyone is wrong and there is unified support. The best way to solve the problem is have it be everyone's problem, not just one person's problem. For FlexPod, you can call NetApp or Cisco, and I think it's the best way to solve the problem that the customer has.
The best improvement is the validated designs. Everything has compliance. Sometimes when you have a trouble with a machine, or in your switch or storage, you can just call one place to solve the problem.
The all-flash with the fabric interconnect, along with the connections between the solution, that is the most important aspect.
Availability is the most valuable part of this solution. It is not the only solution out there that we could use, but it is a very good solution. We have not had any trouble since we installed it.
Our customers choose this solution because of the validated design and for the one-stop solution where it's one contract. It's one building block which is an advantage for the customer instead of buying separate items.
We have offices across the globe in some 20 to 22 countries and there was a time when people from Singapore needed access because they experience similar issues as we do. When we implemented this solution, all 250 VDI sessions seamlessly were accessed over the internet. That's the benchmark.
It simplifies infrastructure from edge to port to cloud. It proves that deployment is easy and straightforward. There isn't any need to do extra work.
We are definitely getting good progress and good improvement from them. It has decreased our data center costs by around 8 to 10 percent.
FlexPod has improved our application performance by 40%.
Reliability and convenience are its most valuable features.
The solution’s validated designs for major enterprise apps in our organization are fairly important. Speed-wise, we are not having any latency issues.
Backup, restore, and ease of deployment are the most valuable features.
We initially started out with siloed clusters and now we've been able to cluster everything together so that we have multiple nodes in our clusters. We have multiples on different data in different data centers. We've able to do replication between data centers. That's been very beneficial for us as we look to derive a mature DR model.
Our data center costs have been lowered. We are in a bit of a unique position where we have a different group that actually pays for the costs of the data center, so we don't see a specific benefit. It's been cost savings in terms of a far smaller footprint in two data centers and then also the associated fewer networking costs as we're just consuming fewer and fewer ports as we've gone to the FlexPod model.
Unplanned downtime incidents have absolutely decreased in my organization. We went from having somewhere around three to five outages every year to us not having had any outages in the past four or five years. That's been very, very beneficial for us.
FlexPod has enabled our staff to be more efficient. They spend less time managing multiple tickets with multiple vendors. If we open a ticket with Cisco and the issue needs to have NetApp pulled in or VMware pulled in, our contact is still Cisco and they still have ownership of the case, as opposed to, without FlexPod, the process would be opening a ticket with Cisco. Cisco would need to check something on the NetApp side. Then we would have to engage NetApp, open a NetApp case, coordinate some time to get everybody together on a WebEx, and then they could say that it's a Windows problem. Then we would have to open a ticket with Microsoft and do the whole thing again. The support is nice to have.
It has decreased the unplanned downtime incidents by around 10%.
The most valuable features are the integration and ease of use. The integration is intuitive.
This solution is easy to learn. There is nothing hidden, and it's all available for you.
The most valuable feature of the solution is the flexibility in configuration and the setup. We have not had any major issues so far.
We use this system for the performance, cost of ownership, agility, expandability of it, and the automation.
I manage this solution, but I don't think of the FlexPod solution on a whole. I manage all of the individual components including Cisco UCS Manager, UCS Director, and UCS Central. I work with all of the storage devices including the flash arrays and the filers. I work with the switches via Flex channel or on the ethernet side.
We use the solution's tiering to a public cloud for archival purposes. We have everything in-house for the most part, but there is some data that is not that critical but needs to be archived because of government regulations. We have to keep it for quite some time.
With respect to the history of innovation, it has affected our ease of use, cost of ownership, we use less manpower to manage it, and we have better uptime. As far as disaster recovery, that's been a really big plus because we have the two fabrics.
The solution has decreased downtime incidents by close to 100%. With the resiliency built into the system, one component fails and the others still work. I mean, you just can't get any better than that. So the stability of the solution is really good.
We have lost a blaze server here and there. But we run about 30 servers on each side, so, losing one isn't that big a deal. Besides that, we don't have that many issues with it. It just works. This is our third iteration. Obviously we bought it the first time and we liked it enough that we bought it again.
We are using for the virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) for our hospital.
We are using a primary and secondary data center model. We have two locations where one is the primary and the other is the DR.
For us as an IT department, it helped us a lot. Before we implemented FlexPod, we were using different solutions all based on a virtual infrastructure. On VMware, before implementing FlexPod, we had a lot of problems doing backups with disaster recovery. After integrating it, it enabled us to have shorter maintenance windows, instant backups, instant recovery, which also minimized the number of alerts that we get from the application team and from the employees who were working on the application that something is not working. Most of the time the reasons for the alerts were backups that had been done or there were some problems with them. Constantly getting snapshots in a virtual infrastructure. Thanks to FlexPod and thanks to NetApp snapshot technology, we were able to reduce it. Even now at this moment, we do not have any kind of information that there's some kind of issue because of backups.
Unified support for the entire stack is really important. It was one of the major points and one of the major decision-makers. FlexPod offered unified support. Before, when using various companies and providers, we had a lot of issues with support. For example, whenever we were opening a case with one of the vendors, they always said that it's not their problem, it's not with their application. Our solution is because of them. With FlexPod, now we do not have that issue. We can go to one of the partners or one of the vendors and tell them we have a problem and they will help us directly. Then they will tell us that they do see a problem that we have. That it's not with Cisco, please contact NetApp, give us the ticket number from NetApp and then it will work jointly or the other way around. Now it's much easier for us, for the technical teams to deal with all the issues, that we have in our environment.
FlexPod has enabled our staff to become more efficient. We have more time. We have been working with FlexPod for around 10 years now. Since then, we've grown three times. We are still managing the difficult infrastructure with the same number of people. I think it is the best proof that having a unified solution can minimize the admin effort.
It is hard to say by how much FlexPod has improved our application performance but we do see improvement. We do see a lower number of tickets coming to us saying that there's a performance issue with applications or there are some latency issues. Once we switched to FlexPod, especially for the last few years, when we are using AFF, we do really not see any kind of tickets coming saying we have performance issues.
FlexPod has decreased unplanned downtime incidents by a lot. With FlexPod, we have the opportunity to do un-disruptive upgrades. Since we began using FlexPod, I did not see any kind of disaster or any kind of maintenance that would really impact applications or end-users. We could do it basically on a daily basis without any kind of problems because of the redundancy, which we have there and the way the upgrades can be done.
Our data center costs have decreased as a result of having FlexPod. We could reduce the number of racks in which we are using in the data center because of the way FlexPod works. I think that at this moment, compared to what we had before using FlexPod, we still have a lower footprint in the data center as we had 10 years ago.
From an infrastructure standpoint, we have more cohesiveness between the teams. This was a concern to us and we're working to solve it so that we can operate in a more efficient manner.
From an ESX node standpoint, using this solution has reduced our footprint tremendously. I would say that it has decreased by approximately thirty-five percent.
We have done a lot of consolidation on the storage side. We have been able to put into one cluster what would have taken three or four in the older environment. It benefits us because there is less administration.
Some of our applications were on solid-state flash disks and some were on a hybrid platform. This new configuration is all-flash, solid-state, so nobody should have complaints about the performance.
The storage performance has most likely increased anywhere from ten percent to probably twenty percent, attributed to the all-flash, solid-state hardware.
We have seen a more efficient use of compute resources because we have fewer nodes committed. I would say that we are probably thirty to thirty-five percent more efficient.
Our maintenance costs have absolutely been reduced. We were going to have to pay between one and two million dollars, and by putting this in, we're avoiding those costs.
Our TCO has been reduced because one big piece of our former infrastructure was made up of Cisco SAN switches, and they are pretty pricey per port when you're using fiber channel. Now, we're using iSCSI, so we're saving a lot of money.
This solution runs our VMs. Our SQL databases, for example, are in our VMs, so everything is virtualized.
Implementing this solution has made our staff more efficient because once it is built, it's a matter of provisioning additional VMs. It's pretty simplified.
I think that with the new all-flash array, our application performance has been improved.
We did not have very much unplanned downtime before implementing our current solution, so I can't say that our new solution is much different in that regard.
This solution has probably not reduced our data center costs because our previous solution was relatively small. It was just one rack.
We hand built our FlexPod environment. It is composed of a Cisco UCS 6332-16UP FI, NetApp AFF A700, and an NDS.
It was easy to build. We had an old FlexPod built by someone else and I built the new one. We're in the process of migrating all the workloads over.
The ease of expansion is the most valuable feature.
The solution's validated designs for major enterprise apps are very important.
Our primary use case is healthcare for billing applications. With FlexPod, we use it mostly on some databases and billing applications. We are also using it now for containers, mostly with VMware.
We have the Cisco UCS M4 Blade Server, 6300 Series Fabric Interconnect, and NetApp AFF A800.
This solution has had a serious impact on our organization. How do you measure not having outages? It has allowed us to do business without any interruptions, which means that I can sleep well at night. After the last hurricane, we were completely up once it ended because we just brought up all of the VMs using VMware.
With respect to the history of innovations, the strategy that NetApp has taken with Cloud volumes online, Azure NetApp files, and all of those things, is good. We've already started using cloud volumes online and we're putting in a new solution with NetApp where we're going to be tiering everything off to Azure because we have a huge presence there. For example, we have an SQL server there, and we're going to be replacing the drives that are on SQL with Cloud Volumes Online so that we can leverage efficiencies. Other data, such as shares, are also going to be tiered off to Azure so that we don't have to be using production cycles, production backups and IOPS and everything, locally. We're instead going to send it to cloud storage.
Using FlexPod has absolutely made our staff more efficient.
This solution has increased our application performance, but we have been using this solution since 2003 and no longer keep metrics.
Our data center costs have been reduced because we've been able to shrink our data center. About ten years ago, we were at about one hundred and seventy servers. Now, we're down to eight blades. We've gone from seven racks down to two racks in the data center, and if you think about power, cooling, and everything else, it's a significant saving.
This solution has improved our organization in that we have reduced administration time and reduced troubleshooting time. We know that the performance is there when we need it.
The history of innovations has had a positive effect on our organization. NetApp is always coming up with features that I want before I know that I want them. For example, it was helpful when we no longer had to dedicate a certain number of disks to our root volume.
In terms of application performance, bringing the AFF in has made a huge difference in some of our manufacturing and labeling applications.
Our primary use case for this solution is virtualization with Hyper-V.
We are using Cisco UCS and NetApp together in our FlexPod solution.
The validated designs for major enterprise applications are very important for our organization because we are part of the local government, and this solution is a critical platform for a broad array of applications and services that we provide to the public.
The history of innovations, in particular, the inclusion of all-flash, has had a positive effect on our database performance.
The unified support is the most valuable feature. What I really enjoy about FlexPod is the support model. You have a single point of contact number for all troubleshooting issues and the vendor that you call takes ownership of the case. It goes with the NetApp validated designs, which are based on Cisco, which is really interesting.
The features of FlexPod that have had an impact on us are the new additions that we have made with the all-flash arrays: added performance, and flexibility management. These are very nice features.
FlexPod can decrease data cost costs because it is an integrated solution.
In our case, we were building out a brand new data center. They were rolling out Epic, which is a big healthcare application. So, we bought 200 UCS servers. This was five years ago when we first implemented this, and the FAS 8060 has been serving this customer very well. It has allowed them to start with what was 26 hospitals and grow up to 45 hospitals, all with the same set of infrastructure over the last five years.
HPE ConvergedSystem: OS
This is an expensive system and not every customer has the kind of budget to support it.
Our HP infrastructure is used as the host system to run our VMware ESXi.
We primarily use the solution as a container-as-a-service. We use it to host containers. It effectively supports a cloud-based container system.
We primarily use the solution for recovery and backup purposes.
I recommend this solution, I think it's easier to implement Converged than other solutions. The solution doesn't require many people to manage or maintain, or involvement with the infrastructure. That's why I would recommend it. It's easy and that's one of the advantages the customer has when they buy a Converge System, it's easier than an iOS infrastructure.
I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10.
Dell EMC VxBlock System: OS
The most valuable feature of this solution is the speed. We have a legacy data center that is separated from the blades. It used to be very slow, and now it is very fast.
We have had no trouble with backups.
The most valuable features of the solution would be its good default features and the compressions. Those are the features we use regularly.
It's a good product but the price could be lowered. It's expensive. The total cost of ownership is a very important figure against quality and performance and pricing. It should be the total package and that is the reason why I think this is a very good product.
The most valuable feature is the flash.
Integration with VMware and VMotion definitely brings a lot of value.
There is an HCI license on top of the VMware license. There are no costs on top of that.
The solution simplified our operations, and made us more efficient. We consolidated from 17 cabinets with IT equipment in the data center. We were able to consolidate down to six cabinets and made a smaller infrastructure footprint, which obviously saves costs and makes the operations more simple and optimized. We also had a non-virtualized environment. What we did is we converted all of our applications to run onto virtualized infrastructure. It's basically helped us in that journey to become more agile.
The monitoring and management parts are the most valuable. Monitoring is specifically valuable because you have one console to monitor everything. This console is called Vision.
Oracle Private Cloud Appliance: OS
The PCA is built on Oracle VM Server for x86 and Oracle VM Manager. Ok, then you have OEM Cloud Control (unfortunately) on top. OVMM uses a clustered MySQL database, which contents are encrypted (probably to keep DBAs away, and force you to use the CLI). OEM Cloud Control uses an Oracle Database, not encrypted, that you can't touch!
As it is now (Feb 2020) the PCA has no automation, there is one Ansible module to start/stop VMs.. that's all the automation. You need to build tools on your own, in 2020, you think of AWS and laugh at the PCA..The Cloud Control interface is slow and crippled, there is no Identity and Access Management, i mean a proper solution. It is a pretty closed system.
The overall engineered system is years behind other vendors, i'm thinking of VMware, OpenStack, Azure Stack. The only selling point is the savings on Oracle licensing. The platform can only be improved.
In my opinion, and i might be horribly wrong here, i would rebuild the system from scratch. There is a great Infiniband infrastructure (SDN), wonderful, keep it. Oracle is moving away from Oracle VM Server to land on KVM, great.
Why can't you have one single database, maybe even based on Oracle Database 18c (or later). Not encrypted, with a license that allows sysadmins to use it to store data useful to the platform. An engine to manage the hypervisors, one engine to manage assets (system provisioning, customers and users), one engine to provide services to customers. Yes, i'm talking of getting rid of OEM! Technically it can be done, but Oracle won't let you. It's easier to have one million Java developers building plugins for what has now become a monster: OEM.
I think that Oracle is not really investing in the PCA because they are far behind the competition, and they can only compete by providing Hard Partitioning. Yeeah.. sorry, not enough to have my million pounds.
This kind of engineered system, in my vision, should have: System provisioning, Identity Management integrated. An Automation engine that taps into the main (a single database) repository to carry out tasks on the platform. Those actions that are scheduled in the internal Job Scheduler (which uses, again, the single database). Messaging between node is done using a message broker, no not AQ, a better one like RabbitMQ (and it's open source). They need a central location to collect logs, and run analytics on them (again, open source solutions here availables). More storage options, the ZFSSA works great for block storage and file (NFS). But you need to have access to object storage, where is it? You could use Apache Cassandra to do that.. (look at Cloudian). Monitoring: do we really have to say that OEM is not exactly the best way to do it? Even Nagios works better for monitoring. I would use collectd (open source) and RabbitMQ to transport metrics. Have Redis on one of the nodes used for management, and have an all in-memory repository, for realtime notifications/alerting (with a monitoring engine here).
When you have the basics, for those workloads that use Oracle Databases, you can introduce a CI tool (i have already built one). Like a version control system for Oracle Databases. That could be used to have automated deployments against the rdbms. Building CI pipelines at that point would be the next logical move. Don't forget that this kind of systems (because it's Oracle) should host an internal DBaaS infrastructure.
Again, i could be wrong on the subject. This is the platform that shines in my dreams. I'm trying to build it, but being alone makes the project long to complete. All i know is that it can be done, and it could be a wonderful platform for virtual machines, and databases, to graze in.
Dell PowerEdge VRTX: OS
Using this solution has lowered costs by including SAN storage, networking, and servers all in one chassis. We used to have half a rack taken with clustered servers, storage devices, and network switches. All that is now consolidated into five U high with four Blade servers and 6 TB of SAN storage in one box.
Management is by web interface which means one place for all configuration.
It helped to reduce cost of ownership in my remote branch office and help better manageability
I'm not sure that there is any competition in this specific solution. I haven't used any other products for this purpose.
Our primary use case is for virtualization but on the current configuration that we have, we don't have the ability of failing over virtual machines from one host to another. They are all isolated independent, they are not configured in a cluster.
We are not scaling it. They are not clustered, they are mostly independent.
We have 60 employees in our organization.
Oracle SuperCluster: OS
Regarding the performance between our old system and the new system, previously we were running the system with IBM, the quarterbacking was running in IBM, then we moved to the Oracle SuperCluster.
The quarterbacking is from Oracle, the hardware and the database is also running on Oracle.
We have seen that there is an improvement in performance. For example, end of the year in IBM, we were running almost twelve and a half hours, but when we moved to Oracle SuperCluster, after the first year it was running for only four hours. It went from twelve and a half hours to four hours.
The performance is significantly improved, and the administration is easy because it is a single platform end-to-end.
Our primary use case is for E-Business Suite applications, the applications for the government, and most of the applications that use an HCM.
Dell EMC Vscale Architecture: OS
My customers procure the HCI boxes from Dell. They deploy it in their data center and then we plan the solution and design or configure the network-based upon how many PLR's and how much storage we need for the Vscale setup. Then we create all the storage-related configuration software policies for networking. We usually use NSX and then we have a different setup. If we are using ACI Cisco it's also a different setup. So we configure it based on company to company. Some of the cases we have configured are portals. In some cases, we use API to provide detailed automated deployment. We have other tools that we use to automate end to end deployment.
The use cases of HCI or even Vscale Architecture are predominantly the areas where the customer has an edge data center or an extended data center where they don't want to set up end to end distributors or fabric costs or to set up network fabric using LTL server switching. We configure the aggregation layer before we sell, plug the plugin distributed cables, manage the networking independently, start it independently, and compute it independently. We use it in the use case when the customer wants an agile type of environment where they can plug and play and get it with a box and a small data center from edge locations. It is for customers who are leveraging IoT of IG setup who have edge data centers and want to be agile and less prone to human errors.
IBM PurePower System: OS
I would like to see an improvement in the management of the solution. The management is really difficult when it comes to systems with traditional services. It is much faster if we manage everything in our infrastructure. So, today we are looking for a smart solution with AI, for example, to get the maximum automation. That is why we choose the converged system or a hyper-converged system. And, of course, we are willing to try some software-defined networks for the data center, App Dynamics, for monitoring application.