What is our primary use case?
Our client who is using SevOne is a large client, it's big. We have to create multiple instances to support their infrastructure on the platform because they are very huge and are on-prem as well as on the cloud. Because Turbonomics is unlimited, they can do certain VM levels. I think you can do 11,000. You can collect 11,000 metrics from the VMs and you cannot go above that number. So let's say if you have 9,000 VMs, you can handle it, but sometimes you become busy and you're doing a lot of collections, or if you start collecting the processes' metrics, that is going to be a problem for you down the line. So we have about eight instances to support the platform on-prem and I think 11 or 12 on the cloud.
How has it helped my organization?
In terms of how SevOne improved the client's overall functioning, they reduced the cost analysis for the people. They are not good with the forecasting. They have their own capacity performance management teams that can now rely on this tool. The other benefit they are getting is that they don't have live support. If any issue comes up, like a performance issue, then the VMs are going to scale up automatically, and it is the same as in Azure. In Azure, the problem is that it is going up and down. It's a problem. When you have the SQL Server, there is the issue that we cannot do that with it.
Sometimes we have a lockup. If you have a lockup of the VM in Azure, the scale-up and down won't work. So the benefit you're getting is that we have a maintenance window, and in that maintenance window we tell everybody that we're going to scale-up or scale-down these VMs, any of these issues, and we have the maintenance time to do that. That's the benefit they're getting on that certain time. But it is not doing it automatically because in Azure there is always an issue with that. As for the VMware environment on-prem, you can do it. It does it automatically.
What is most valuable?
The feature that I have found most valuable is the scale-up and scale-down. The scale-up is an operation where the CPU boosts-up and then the memory will boost-up. That works awesomely. But the problem is when you do the case analysis, like a price analysis. Let's say you have the price. When you go to market, it picks up the cheapest rate or maybe coupons. If Azure sometimes give us a very great deal, then the Turbonomics doesn't kick in to evaluate that price. So that evaluation is always an issue that comes up. They cannot do that. They always have differences in the price. They never get those things right. That could be answered with no problem for the cloud.
What needs improvement?
In terms what could be improved, they need to integrate and get a better price. They can do cost analysis with Azure. They need to have a live cost analysis for the discounts, because if you have multiple thousands of VMs that you're doing, of course you're going to get a discount. Correct?
If you're only doing a few of them, you won't get a discount. That's the reason why they have to value the discount and coupons. The other con is that they need to be better with the accountability. In other words, the accounts or reports are not better than the others, compared with vRealize. The other thing is that you cannot write any kind of script in it to customize it to get other reports. So I'm shifting the gear into reports now.
There can be a problem of Microsoft versus Turbonomics. Because Microsoft won't allow the bigger clients to know what they're giving as a discount and they don't want Turbonomics to know what kind of discount I'm giving them. So there are pros and cons. Because these companies have a monopoly, they don't want the information of their biggest client to get out and say, "Okay, these are the coupons and these are the discounts I'm getting and let's see what Turbonomics can do."
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In terms of stability, if the box is getting hot, is it having a performance issue?
It is a stable solution. They don't have to call anybody. If anybody is having any problem or performance issue, it's going to scale-up from a VMware point of view. But in Azure, sometimes if the VM needs more memory, more CPU, it cannot do that upgrade because of the lockouts. Then it's SevOne and there has to be a call out to the technical support team who comes from the bridge and starts checking the issue. That is a possibility. You can consider this tool a stable solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability is great, amazing.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support is pretty good. They are very helpful. You will have some folks who have a lot of knowledge and some who don't. So you always have this pro and con there.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is a little bit complex and you have to first create the main database. After you create the database, make sure you start collecting. Then you have multiple collectors that start collecting the information and send it to the database. They are really technical and it's Linux based.
The setup takes about one or two days.
Usually, when you do an upgrade it takes eight hours.
What was our ROI?
In terms of ROI, when we implement SevOne, issues and calls come in and there's the reduced cost of not having a person look at it because it does it automatically. When it does it automatically, you have a timeframe if the issue doesn't resolve automatically, at which point you may have to report to a person, "Okay, this application or these VMs or whatever are having problems right now." Then you have to take a look at it and see what happened. Sometime you can clear the logs and do all the other basic techniques like the other tools do. You manually clear the log and then you look at these things. Or you can create a policy and then the extra policy will come into place. Or sometimes the time doesn't match right or your timestamps changes and you'll face these kinds of problems.
What other advice do I have?
If you're asking for technical comments, then I can describe it in detail, but this is more general. For example, the IT operation can continue working the way it is, but they have to integrate SevOne into their environment. How do they want to do it? We don't know. It all depends on the different clients.
I use a lot of tools, actually. Here are the things I can recommend about Turbonomics: Scale-up, scale-down. But again, for reporting purposes, sorry, no recommendation there. The customizations are very hard. The person doing it has to be very good at analytics and has to be very good in all languages, like C-Sharp, unless you want to use the Python tool. I don't know if the Python evokes the scripts in it. I think it does, but it's very, very hard. You need a developer to write the customized reports for whatever you're looking for. If a regular person were using Turbonomics, like admin folks, they wouldn't be able to do that, unless they are a programmer.
They have to make it better for reporting. That's the first thing. Also the discount, like I mentioned about the Azure discount. It would be good if they could just get the number right.
On a scale of one to ten, I am neutral because it is not too good and not too bad. I would give SevOne a five.
In order to make it a 10, they would have to get their staff members highly active and focused on the customer's issues, and just focused on the product, on saving money. On-prem, they need to focus more on the Azure side of the house and cloud. The need to improve their internal technical knowledge and expertise. They need to hire really top-notch folks in Turbonomics.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?