Posts tagged with AMD Opteron
Live Migration: The Best Keeps Getting Better with AMD Opteron™ Processors
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 8:00 AM
Loading ...It’s been a busy couple of months, as AMD has been working in tandem with Microsoft on their whole suite of “new efficiency” products – namely, Windows® 7 and Windows Server® 2008 R2. There has been a great deal of excitement over these launches for some time now; and rightfully so. Windows 7 is a big deal for the industry as a whole, and we’re specifically excited about the graphics capabilities as well as its great matchup with Vision Technology from AMD.* But, what I want to talk about is, not surprisingly, what the IT guys play with: servers. Windows Server 2008 R2 has major implications for virtualization in particular, and here’s why:
Some of the largest enhancements to Windows Server 2008 R2 focus around Hyper-V – Microsoft’s hypervisor. Hyper-V R2 works hand-in-hand with AMD Virtualization™ (AMD-V™) technology to help reduce the overall complexity and memory overhead of managing VMs, particularly through inherent features of AMD-V technology, like Rapid Virtualization Indexing (RVI). However, another one of the capabilities that you’ll find interesting is live migration. IT Managers are always vocal about the need to dynamically move virtual workloads around in order to optimize their system performance and aid with possible disaster recovery. AMD has worked with our virtualization partners since the early days of the AMD Opteron™ processor, to ensure we have the technology in place to support seamless live migration, and our consistent server platforms are critical for this.
Case in point: we recently worked with Microsoft to showcase live migration of virtual machine from our current Six-Core AMD Opteron processor to our next-generation AMD Opteron™ 6100 Series processor (currently codenamed “Magny-Cours”) with Hyper-V (you may recall, we did this previously, but from Quad-Core to Six-Core AMD Opteron processors here). Have a look for yourself:
As you can tell, Windows Server 2008 R2 is already enabled for the upcoming AMD Opteron 6100 Series processor. In fact Microsoft recently made available for download an update designed to boost the power-saving features of the latest Windows client and server releases when used with AMD multi-core processors. This refresh can tweak the Windows Server 2008 RS in order to leverage the Enhanced C1 state (C1E) for lower power consumption, which is a power efficiency feature of the AMD Opteron™ 6000 Series platform.
We’re pleased to congratulate Windows Server 2008 R2 on its introduction to the market, and can’t wait to push the boundaries on virtualization even more!
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a Product Marketing Director at AMD. Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
* Windows® 7 capable PC required for full Windows 7 functionality. See http://windows.microsoft.com/systemrequirements.
Simply Spectacular Virtualization with 4P Six-Core AMD Opteron™ Processor-based Systems
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 4:40 PM
When I was attending VMworld in September, one of the most frequently asked question was “how do I decide whether to use 2P Intel Xeon 5500 processor-based servers or 4P Six-Core AMD OpteronTM processor-based servers for virtualization?” Over the past few weeks I have done a lot of research and put together a solid picture of where a 4P server can provide an amazing amount of value and efficiency.
Low and behold – I was not the only person working on this thought thread. We recently sent Johan De Gelas with AnandTech a 4P Six-Core AMD Opteron processor-based system. And in his review, “Expensive Quad Sockets vs. Ubiquitous Dual Sockets,” Johan focuses on some interesting points on the same topic (which my colleague John Fruehe discusses on the @Work blog as well). While he compares a number of workloads on 2P servers versus 4P servers- my interest was drawn to the section where Johan discusses one of my most favorite topics – virtualization (surprise, surprise).
In my research I have been taking a look at the pricing of 2P and 4P servers with larger memory configurations. Here is a snapshot of system costs using processors with similar specifications. Note how steeply the system price climbs for the 2P servers as the memory configurations grow.
| HP ProLiant DL385 G6 Server | HP ProLiant DL380 G6 Server | HP ProLiant DL585 G6 Server |
| 2 Six-Core AMD OpteronTM Processors Model 2431 (”Istanbul”), 2.4GHz, 75W ACP | 2 Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor Model E5530 (”Gainestown”), 2.40GHz, 80W TDP | 4 Six-Core AMD OpteronTM Processors Model 2431 (”Istanbul”), 2.4GHz, 75W ACP |
| 64GB REG PC2-6400 16×4GB Dual Rank Memory | 64GB PC3-10600R 16×4GB 2Rank Memory |
64GB REG PC2-6400 16×4GB Dual Rank Memory |
|
$5,560.00 |
$7,272.00 |
$16,120.00 |
| 96GB Reg PC2-5300 12×8GB Memory | 96GB PC3-8500R 12×8GB 2Rank Memory |
96GB REG PC2-6400 24×4GB Dual Rank Memory |
|
$14,282.00 |
$15,922.00 |
$17,156.00 |
| 128GB Reg PC2-5300 16×8GB Memory | 128GB PC3-10600R 16×8GB 2Rank Memory | 128GB REG PC2-6400 32×4GB Dual Rank Memory |
|
$17,880.00 |
$31,242.00 |
$18,192.00 |
Johan came to a similar conclusion ”A very large database or virtualization consolidation scenario requiring more than 72GB of RAM will probably push you towards the quad Istanbul – once you need more than 64-72GB, memory gets really expensive on the Intel dual socket platform. There are two reasons for this: 8GB DIMMs are five times more expensive than 4GB DIMMs, and DDR3 is still more costly than DDR2 (especially in large DIMMs).”
OK – this is a compelling cost message. But what about performance? Johan gives two examples of performance – current VMmark scores with systems that have memory configurations ranging from 64GB to 128GB, and vApus Mark I, their own in-house developed virtualization benchmark, designed to measure the performance of “heavy” performance-critical applications and done in cooperation with the Sizing Servers Lab.
For performance details, latest results, and system configurations see http://www.vmware.com/products/vmmark/results.html.
So compelling performance - and more importantly – very compelling price/performance.
I did one other exercise during my research. Instead of just comparing server to server – I took a look at comparing a 42U rack of 2P servers versus a 42U rack of 4P servers. Using the system costs from the example above here is another snap shot
|
HP ProLiant DL380 G6 Server Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor (”Gainestown”) |
HP ProLiant DL585 G6 Server Six-Core AMD Opteron processor (”Istanbul”) |
|
| Total Number of Servers |
21 |
10 |
| Total Number of Processors |
42 |
40 |
| Total Number of Cores |
168 |
240 |
| Cost of servers with 64GB RAM |
$152,712 |
$161,200 |
| Cost of servers with 96GB RAM |
$334,362 |
$171,560 |
| Cost of servers with 128GB RAM |
$656,082 |
$181,920 |
The price difference of servers to fill a 42U rack is less than $10,000 when comparing 2P and 4P servers with 64GB of RAM – and over $400,000 more for 2P with 128GB of RAM compared to similarly configured 4P servers.
So the take away from my research – 4P servers running Six Core AMD Opteron processors provide the cores, memory and price to achieve simply spectacular virtualization! And, as I noted, to get some additional insights on the same topic, check out my colleague John Fruehe’s recent blog “AMD Opteron Processor – Delivering True Value, Not Just Benchmarks.”
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a Product Marketing Director at AMD.
Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
New Efficiencies with AMD and Microsoft – How Silicon and Software Make Virtualization Happen
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 4:12 PM
Last week I was in San Francisco at the kick-off of the Microsoft New Efficiency Launch where Steve Ballmer showcased the new releases of three key products used by the businesses around the world: Windows® 7, Window Server® 2008 R2, and Exchange 2010. AMD is a sponsor of this launch and we are excited about the excellent alignment of AMD OpteronTM processor-based servers and AMD Business Class technology-based clients.
If you look at the products Microsoft is launching you see a lot of features designed to help businesses streamline and optimize their IT infrastructure. One point of interest at the launch event was the strong focus on virtualization with both Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows 7.
Enterprise customers at the San Francisco event were talking about their implementations of Windows Hyper-V – something you might not have heard a year ago. Features like live migration and support for AMD VirtualizationTM (AMD-VTM) technology Rapid Virtualization Indexing (RVI) are new functionalities in Hyper-V R2. This is the result of the on-going collaboration between AMD and Microsoft on an engineering level – and the value it brings to customers is a virtualization platform that can efficiently and effectively run demanding applications such as database, web serving, and virtual desktops.
Virtualization with Windows 7 was showcased with a demo showing XP mode – a virtual machine running Windows XP that allowed seamless access to an older applications using Windows 7 capable machines. AMD-V technology again plays a role here – helping to improve performance to maintain a solid user experience. And virtual desktop technology – the streaming of applications and entire desktops from central servers to clients – is enhanced with Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2.
There are a number of events in progress throughout North America – check out if there is an event near you so you can see the products in action first hand. If you can’t attend the events alive and in person – visit the AMD booth at the Microsoft New Efficiency Virtual Experience.
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a Product Marketing Director at AMD.
Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
Of Cloud and High Performance Computing Clusters
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 4:05 PM
The Summer Solstice kicked off an interesting week featuring two computing conferences that at first glance seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum. From June 23 to June 26: the International Supercomputing Conference in Hamburg, with a focus on bleeding edge, high performance computing (HPC). June 25: the GigaOM Network presents a premiere event for Cloud Computing and Internet infrastructure, Structure09 in San Francisco (I’ll post more on my thoughts from this conference tomorrow).
Now you might ask, “what do these events have in common?” The answer ─the heart and soul of both HPC and Cloud Computing is the “compute cluster” -an approach that links groups of computers together and has been driven into mainstream by x86 computers. And while the applications these clusters are driving and the data they are delivering might be drastically different – there are some basic commonalities on an infrastructure level.
Both types of clusters thrive on multi-core processors. More cores typically deliver more compute capabilities that can translate into performing more calculations for the HPC world and handling more transactions for the Cloud world. Power consumption is a nagging problem since larger and more powerful clusters commonly eat up a lot of energy and demand a lot of cooling. Both are driving new advancements in our digital world: HPC clusters help us solve some of today’s most complex problems while cloud computing provides the framework for searching and sharing the answers. And, of course, there is this bothersome economy influencing how many servers can be added to any type of data center.
So, what is AMD doing to design for both types of clusters? We continue to drive a balance of price, performance, and power into our processor architectures. Our server processor road map demonstrates an understanding of the real needs of both HPC and cloud clusters. Our G34 platforms, under the platform name of “Maranello,” are designed for expandability and performance. Our C32 platforms, under the platform name “San Marino,” help provide the low cost and power consumption that many cloud providers require.
I spent time last month in AMD’s Bellevue office and met with a talented group of AMD engineers who are working on further developing their understanding of the hardware and software requirements for cloud computing so they can further optimize AMD processor-based platforms. As a company we are continuing our efforts to help refine the underlying technology that will enable both types of clusters in the future─toward the goal of improved platform power efficiency, software methodologies to efficiently drive heterogeneous cores, enhanced graphics capabilities for improved user experience, and the continued maturation of virtualization for x86-based computers.
My colleague John Fruehe published a blog that takes a closer look at why he believes the AMD OpteronTM processor is ideal for supercomputing. I will similarly be posting a blog on cloud computing and giving you my first hand view of the Structure09 conference.
I can’t resist ending on a HPC note – particularly since, in a galaxy far away (it was actually last century), I was a part of the HPC community, working at the Maui High Performance Computing Center. Take a close look at the Top500 list and notice that AMD Opteron processors are in the #1 and #2 supercomputers – as are 9 of the top 20 computers. At AMD we design for innovation and quality!
Let me know your thoughts – what similarities do you see between HPC and Cloud clusters?
Margaret Lewis, director, AMD commercial software and solutions
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a Product Marketing Director at AMD. Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
@margaretjlewis
Simply Spectacular Virtualization – Istanbul Edition
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 11:47 AM
Simply Spectacular Virtualization – Istanbul Edition
With the introduction of Six-Core AMD OpteronTM processor (codenamed “Istanbul”), there is now enough public information on the web to take a closer look at configurations and pricing of Six-Core AMD Opteron processor-based systems (”Istanbul”) and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor-based systems (”Gainestown”) that have posted top VMmark scores.
Before I dive into the comparisons, let me acknowledge that I’m sure a lot of people will call “foul” with this comparison since the Intel Xeon 5570 processor-based system uses 96GB of memory and the AMD Opteron 2435 processor-based system uses 64GB of memory. Let me remind you that these are the “VMmark configurations” which are submitted by OEMs.
Here is the comparison of VMmark configurations for similar models of HP ProLiant 2P/2U G6 systems that were priced on the HP ProLiant Server web site on Friday, June 5, 2009. Each system had the processors and memory configuration as listed on VMmark disclosure documents along with the default disk controller, one 146 GB hard drive, and the default hardware warranty.
|
|
HP ProLiant DL380 G6 |
HP ProLiant DL385 G6 |
HP ProLiant DL385 G6 |
|
Processor |
Intel Xeon Processor |
AMD OpteronTM Processor |
AMD OpteronTM Processor |
|
Memory |
96GB DDR3 1066 MHz |
64GB DDR2 667 MHz |
64GB DDR2 800 MHz |
|
System Cost |
$18,032 |
$11,724 |
$6,920 |
|
VMmark 1.1 Score |
24.15@17tiles |
15.54@11 tiles |
Estimated 60 VMs |
|
Cost per VM US$ (system cost/VMs) |
$177 |
$177 |
Estimated $115 |
The HP ProLiant DL385 G6 running Six-Core AMD Opteron processors (”Istanbul”) offers the same cost per VM as the ProLiant DL380 G6 running Intel Xeon 5570 model with a system cost that is about 1/3 less. It should be noted that the DL385 is using a standard processor model as opposed to the high-end processor model used by the DL380.
You can configure the AMD technology-based DL385 with a considerably cheaper 64GB configuration using 16 x 4GB DIMMs. This results in a system cost that is almost 2/3 less than the Intel configuration using 12 x 8GB DIMMs. Assuming that there is about 10% performance difference compared to the 8 x 8GB AMD processor-based configuration with this alternate memory configuration, the estimated cost per VM would be $115. Mind you: the 10% performance difference here is not a measured result – it is more or less an educated guess of what we might see if we changed our memory configuration from 8 x 8GB to 16 x 4GB. But it shows that shows that it should be possible to get an even better cost per VM and overall system cost using AMD technology-based systems. It should be noted that the DL380 does not offer a cheaper 96GB memory configuration – the configuration listed is the cheapest.
In order to show a more comprehensive comparison I have done a hypothetical 64GB comparison (listed below). I have selected a comparable memory configuration for DL380 system using the HP DDR3 Memory Configuration Tool to decide the best configuration for the DL380 system due to the complexities surrounding configuring systems with Intel Xeon 5570 3 memory channel architecture. The recommendation from HP for virtualization was to 8 x 8GB DIMMs. For the DL385 I show both 8 x 8GB and 16 x 4GB memory configurations since both of these configurations are valid and result in well performing systems. I have also listed the cost per VM when running 10, 20, 40, and 60 VMs per system. Keep in mind the average number of VMs per server may be closer to 10. For reference, responses to SearchDataCenter.com’s 2008 Purchasing Intentions Survey reveals that only 5% of respondents are running more than 25 VMs on a server – 61% are running less than 10 VMs per server and 33% are running 10 to 25 VMs per server.
|
|
HP ProLiant DL380 G6 |
HP ProLiant DL385 G6 |
HP ProLiant DL385 G6 |
|
Processor |
Intel Xeon Processor 95 Watts TDP |
AMD OpteronTM Processor |
AMD OpteronTM Processor |
|
Memory |
64GB DDR3 1066 MHz Virtualization Config per HP DDR3 Configuration Tool |
64GB DDR2 667 MHz |
64GB DDR2 800 MHz |
|
System Cost |
$14,072.00 |
$11,724.00 |
$6,920.00 |
|
10 VMs |
$1,407.20 |
$1,172.40 |
$692.00 (estimated) |
|
20 VMs |
$703.60 |
$586.20 |
$346.00 (estimated) |
|
40 VMs |
$351.80 |
$293.10 |
$173.00 (estimated) |
|
60 VMs |
$234.53 |
$195.40 |
$115.33 (estimated) |
In both comparisons in this blog it is obvious that the Six-Core AMD Opteron processor (”Istanbul”) continues AMDs focus on producing a processor that offers a balance of performance, power and price. A similar comparison of VMmark systems and price/performance can be found on SolutionOrientedBlog.
Let me know your thoughts about these comparisons.
Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
Margaret Lewis, director, AMD commercial software and solutions
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a commercial software and solutions director at AMD.
@margaretjlewis
Time for a Quiz? Freeways:LA as CPU Cores:[X]
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 9:29 AM
Earlier this month I attended Microsoft’s TechEd conference in LA, and the question that kept popping up throughout the show was: why more cores??
The interest in multi-core chips has been generated by AMD’s most recent roadmap update outlining our move to processors with 6-, 8- and 12-cores. The benefit of more cores, to me, is most easily equated to something I saw a lot of in LA – freeways.
Adding more cores is like adding extra lanes, allowing for more resources to drive virtual machines more effectively. Further, the more cores you add, the more CPU power you also have to divide among virtual machines, which means you can drive more overall VMs on that preverbal freeway. Essentially, you now have more room and more resources to drive up the efficiency of VMs across an entire system. A more detailed explanation on why more cores are useful can be found on Tim Mueting’s blog post on 4 Socket Servers and Real World Virtualization.
However, even AMD can admit: it’s not all about cores. Advancements in virtualization on the hardware level include features like “HyperTranport assist” – to be introduced with Six-Core AMD Opteron™ processor codename “Istanbul” – to provide optimizations at the cache level that are designed to show a real benefit in 4- and 8-socket systems. Since we are seeing virtualization customers focusing a lot of attention on these larger, robust platforms in terms of cores and memory, this new feature promises to enable improved performance and efficiency (two things we like!). The industry is starting to get excited about “Istanbul” – check out Quick Take: AMD Istanbul Update blog.
Also, as we move to more cores, We’re planning to introduce another exciting development in virtualization – the support of AMD-Vi (IOMMU) which is scheduled to hit the market later this year. AMD-Vi is designed to help improve security and performance by directly assigned devices to virtual machines. Further, continued optimizations are in the works to address the TLB, caches and improving the switching capabilities.
But what about the software? Plain and simple, hypervisors are ready and waiting for more cores. Microsoft, Citrix, VMware all have versions ready to handle the growing number of cores, with Hyper-V, XenServer, and vSphere. Our six-core “Istanbul” is due out in June and will be supported across 2-, 4- and 8- socket servers, which range from 12 to 48 cores! And, as we continue to grow our core count through our 12-core AMD Opteron processor codenamed “Magny-Cours”, expect to see even more collaboration with our software partners to make sure we’re optimizing to provide the most value to the end user.
Finally, talks are heating up around graphic virtualization and live migration across heterogeneous processor environments. Lots to get excited about – stay tuned!
Margaret Lewis, director, AMD commercial software and solutions
Margaret Lewis (@margaretjlewis) is a Product Marketing Director at AMD. Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
@margaretjlewis
Four-Socket Servers for Real World Virtualization
Posted by AMD in 1:37 PM
Customers are often asking what server configuration they should choose for their virtualization environment. Do they go with a 2-socket multi-core based system, the traditional building block of the Data Center, or should they select a 4-socket server, which typically has more RAS features and better capacity in terms of cores, memory, and I/O better support their needs? It’s kind of like choosing to go on vacation with that convertible you love to drive on the weekends or your trusty sedan that you go to work in every day! They both have their purpose but one may be better suited for the task at hand.
A recent survey conducted by Gabriel Consulting Group highlighted some interesting x86 server purchasing trends. The largest market for x86 servers is still the 2-socket based servers, with almost 40% of the respondents saying they are planning on purchasing “more” or “many more” systems in the coming year. But, the survey also reflected an increasing interest in 4-socket servers with 33% of the respondents saying they intend to purchase these systems in greater volumes.
A key driver in this trend towards larger servers is virtualization. When it comes to virtualization, there are compelling advantages to be realized in implementing 4-socket or even 8-socket systems;
- Reduced hardware footprint. Particularly important for data centers that are space constrained and want to use fewer numbers of larger servers to consolidate both infrastructure and business application workloads.
- More cores. There is evidence that 2P servers can adequately support a large number of virtual machines running very light workloads where each virtual machine uses one or at most two virtual CPUs to get the job done.
- o However, for more demanding workloads, the more virtual CPUs you can assign to each VM (in other words, the more cores you have available) the better each workload will run. It should be noted that VMware’s recently introduced vSphere product has increased capabilities to support up to 8 virtual CPUs per VM, anticipating the continued migration of more demanding, production-level applications to virtualized environments.
- o A good example of this is seen in a paper highlighting the best practices for deploying Citrix XenApp with XenServer for HP ProLiant servers, where scalability is shown to degrade if you assign more virtual CPUs than there are physical CPU cores.
- Larger memory footprint. The amount of memory available is particularly important for resource intensive workloads that process large amounts of information or stream data to many concurrent user sessions as is the case with a virtual desktop infrastructure. AMD OpteronTM processor-based 4-socket servers like the HP Proliant DL585 G5 and the Dell PowerEdge R905 can handle up to 256GB of memory per server while the HP Proliant DL785 and Sun Fire X4600 can handle up to 512GB of memory while 2-socket servers can only provide up to 144GB of memory.
- Additional headroom for peak workloads. Often more demanding workloads like transaction-based business applications have less predictable workloads that peak with high demand. The additional cores, memory, and I/O capabilities of 4-socket servers give you this scalability edge to handle these bursts.
- Consolidation of larger numbers of applications. While theoretically possible, most IT shops are currently not running hundreds of virtual machines on a single server. But, optimal virtual machine density is still a goal of many organizations implementing virtualization today. Four-socket servers provide a reliable and highly efficient platform for consolidation particularly for data intensive or more heavily utilized workload.
No discussion on the benefits of virtualization and 4-socket servers would be complete without addressing the aspect of ROI. There is a fantastic article recently posted by Collin MacMillan that shows Shanghai Refresh Delivers ROI in 2-months using Intel’s ROI calculations for a Nehalem server replacement that yields an ROI in eight months. Collin also references an Intel/IDC white paper that concludes, “Systems based on 4P platforms provide better consolidation ratios and scalability than 2P platforms.”
In the end it’s all about having the right balance of resources – CPU, memory, network and storage. As system utilization increases to 50% or more through virtualization, there is an increased demand for balanced systems with the potential for providing higher levels of CPU and memory resources.
One thing is for sure, there is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to virtualization. Customers are finding more and more workloads that are suitable for virtualization due to technology improvements like you see with AMD Opteron multi-core processors with AMD-VTM technology. So which one is going to get you to your destination, the convertible or the SUV?
Tim Mueting is a Product Marketing Manager at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
Keep it Simple, Silly
Posted by Margaret Lewis in 1:01 AM
Call me a technology purist, but I love when things are simple. After all, that’s supposed to be what use technology does, right? Make our lives more productive, make our businesses more efficient and streamline processes that previously couldn’t be done manually (or if they could – took lots of effort). That’s exactly why I’m excited about VMware’s Fault Tolerance technology. As you may have seen last week, VMware introduced its vSphere 4 cloud computing OS, and the Fault Tolerance feature is a big part of this new solution.
As described by VMware, Fault Tolerance helps provide continuous availability with a simple ‘click of a button’ – something that gives businesses with virtualized data center environments peace of mind. At AMD, we have been thinking about continuous availability and disaster recovery for years and architected our AMD OpteronTM processors, in part, to address this. If you are a regular reader of my blog, you may know we’ve focused this effort on the hardware side with our live migration capabilities (something we specifically call Extended Migration) across all of our processor generations, dating back to single-core Opteron processors! But why is this important? Well, with an AMD Opteron processor-based data center, an IT manager can dynamically move VMs across physical servers and in the case of a hardware failure-do so without interrupting services to users. VMware takes this one step further with Fault Tolerance software that is designed to provide even more reliability.
What is so interesting about VMware’s Fault Tolerance is that it works to create a “shadow instance” of the virtual machine that is in lockstep with the primary instance (not surprisingly, part of VMware’s vLockstep technology). We have worked with VMware to make sure our hardware provides a solid foundation for their technology, and are extremely excited at the value it can offer our customers. More than anything, it addresses the number one concern we hear from customers when they consider virtualization: how reliable is this technology? What happens if there is an earthquake or a pipe bursts in my office? How do I ensure my data is protected?
Of course, it’s natural to be a bit hesitant at the thought of virtualizing your most critical business applications, but it’s my job to let customers know these risks are addressed with virtualization. Unique hardware features like AMD Extended Migration and software like VMware’s Fault Tolerance not only help your trusty IT manager (and you) sleep better at night, but also help make their job easier by including reliability features directly on the hardware and software. Its complex technology made simple. I like the sound of that.
is a Product Marketing Director at AMD. Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.
Margaret Lewis, director, AMD commercial software and solutions
Margaret Lewis
@margaretjlewis