SQL Server Consolidation and Virtualization:Myths and RealitiesJoe YongChief ArchitectScalability Expertsjyong@scalabilityexperts.com

SESSION CODE: DAT 205

Before we beginGoals

Understand the goals and requirements of consolidationReview common oversights, myths and best practices for consolidationRelationship between consolidation and virtualizationReal problems to be addressed Picking the right solution for the problem

Non-goalsDeep dive into consolidation or virtualization technologiesOne size fits all scripted solutionFlashy SQL Server demo fest

AgendaConsolidation reviewVirtualization reviewThe real problemsCommon groundRight solution for the problem

Why consolidate

Short term benefitsImmediate cost savings –licenses, infrastructure, maintenance, HADRHalt / reverse uncontrolled growth and/or allow growthRegulatory complianceImprove utilization levels

Long term benefitsOperational costs savingsExpand and extendSimplify managementStandardization of SLAs / support

What to consolidateEasy candidates

Small & medium sizedRead-only or mostly reads

Average candidatesBusiness critical but no special requirementsVLDB with low to moderate workload demands

Tough candidatesVery high availability requirementsExtremely busy workload (‘000s of transactions per second)High / complex security settingsHard coded paths

Additional considerations and caveatsConsolidate homogeneous/similar workloads

Generally good guideline but there are caveatsLikely to have similar resource utilization and/or demand characteristicsPeak utilization at same time periods – contention

Mixed workloads with different peak periods and resource utilization are viable

ISV applicationsCase-by-case; check with the ISV

Always end in one (1) central locationRegional consolidation is viable; often practical

Get buy in from all parties/peersGood to do but top-down mandate is critical for success

Consolidation strategy

Inte

ropera

bili

ty

Lower cost, better control

Reduce Servers

File Server

Database

Email

Forward Consolidation(new deployments)

Backward Consolidation(current systems)

Improve Management

Enterprise IT – CIO/BDM point of view

Enterprise IT – DBA/SysAdmin POV

Consolidation optionsSingle instance, single database, multi-schema

Very difficult to achieveCommon in “Other” database platformSignificant opportunity for conflicts, contention, management complexity and

security overlapGenerally not recommended

Single server, single instance , multi-databaseDifficult to achieve, but gives best utilizationSome resource isolation with Resource GovernorSome security isolation with encryption and extensible key managementSome namespace conflicts (e.g. logins)Shared resource/configuration conflicts (e.g.TempDB, collation)

Consolidation optionsSingle server, multi-Instance

Good resource controls with SQL Server settings (optionally with WSRM)Good security isolation (if best practices are followed)Minimal namespace conflictsFlexible deployment and management modelMulti-version support

Single server, single/multi instances on virtual machinesDifferent virtualization technologies available – ensure only supported vendors/configurations are

used (see SVVP)Sprawl is “virtualized”, but management of instances is not reducedSlightly higher minimum resource overhead per serverLimited scalabilityVirtual machine farm can be implemented for VM portability

Consolidation optionsSingle server, multiple physical partitions

Reduces physical sprawl but limited reduction in licensesUsed in combination with previous models (multi-instance, multi-database)Very good resource and security isolationLimited platform support

Consolidation options

SQL Server 2008/2005 supports up to 50 instancesActual number limited by platform, resources, availability, manageability and security considerations

Physical Server

Physical Server

Windows

VM VM

SQL Server

Test

SQLServerDev SQL

ServerProd

Management Tools

Partition N

Windows

SQLServerApp 2

SQLServer

Test

Management Tools

Child partition 2

Other OS

SQL Server App n

Management Tools

Child partition 1

Windows Server 2008

Rootpartition

Windows Server 2008

SQL Server App 3

Virtual MachineManager

Hypervisor

Management Tools

AgendaConsolidation reviewVirtualization reviewThe real problemsCommon groundRight solution for the problem

Virtual machines overviewTwo or more (mostly) isolated operating systems running concurrently on the same physical machine

Mostly independent operations, access and controls

Commonly run on servers but also useful on desktops/workstations

E.g. Legacy application support, dev/test

Common architectures

Hosted virtualization

Virtual Server, Virtual PC, VM Ware Workstation

Hypervisor virtualization

Hyper-V, VMWare ESX, Xen

x86/x64 Server

Windows Server 2003/2008

Virtualization Service

Guest OSApplication

Guest OSApplication

Virtual Hardware

VM architecture: hosted

VM architecture: hypervisor based

Hardware

Windows hypervisor (hyper-V)

Rootpartition

Servercore

Apps

OS 1 OS 2

Apps Apps

Child partition

Child partition

Windows Server 2008

VSPWindows Kernel

Applications(user mode)

Applications (user mode)

Applications (user mode)

Non-Hypervisor Aware OS

Windows Server 2003, 2008

Windows KernelVSC

VMBus Emulation

“Designed for Windows Server” hardware

Windows hypervisor (scheduler, memory management)

Xen-Enabled Linux Kernel

Linux VSC

Hypercall Adapter

Parent/root partition Child Partitions

VM Service

WMI Provider

VM Worker Processes

OSISV / IHV / OEM

Microsoft Hyper-VMicrosoft / XenSource

User Mode

Kernel Mode

Provided by:

Ring -1

IHV Drivers

VMBus

VMBus

Applications

Hyper-V architecture

Source: Jeff Woosley (Sr. PM) Microsoft Hyper-V, Scenarios and Networking presentation

Example 1: Hyper-V VMs optimizationEach VM on its own network switch

Windows Server 2008 VM 2VM 1

“Designed for Windows” Server Hardware

Windows hypervisor

VM 3

Child Partitions

User Mode

KernelMode

Ring -1MgmtNIC 1MgmtNIC 1

VSwitch 1NIC 2

VSwitch 1NIC 2

VSPVSP

VSP

VSwitch 2NIC 3

VSwitch 2NIC 3

VSwitch 3NIC 4

VSwitch 3NIC 4

Applications Applications Applications

VM Service

WMI Provider

VM Worker Processes

Windows Kernel VSC Windows

KernelVSC Linux Kernel VSC

VMBus VMBus VMBusVMBus

Parent / root partition

Source: HP Corp.

Server Hardware

Hard Partition

Operating System (OS)

Appl

icat

ion

Server Hardware

Hard Partition

Operating System (OS)

Appl

icat

ion

Server Hardware

Hard Partition

Operating System (OS)

Appl

icat

ion

Server Hardware

Hard Partition (nPar)

OS vPar

Appl

icat

ion

OS vPar

Appl

icat

ion

OS vPar

Appl

icat

ion

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Appl

icat

ion

OS

Appl

icat

ion

Appl

icat

ion

Workload Management

Server Hardware (e.g. 6 cpu’s)

Hard Partition (nPar – 6 cpu’s)

Appl

icat

ion

OS (2 fixed, 2 float)

Appl

icat

ion

Appl

icat

ion

Appl

icat

ion

Appl

icat

ion

Appl

icat

ion

OS (2 fixed, 2 float)

Dynamic Workload Management

Dynamic Workload Management

Virtualization

OS Stacking

Workload Mgmt & App Stacking

OS + Application Stacking+ Dynamic Workload Mgmt

One App-One Server

One App-One Server

One App-One Server

Float CPU’s can move dynamically between separate OS’s depending on load, time of day or manual intervention.

Note that resources between multiple separate systems cannot be shared, hence low utilization.

Reduces server hardware, but not OS licenses – need same number of OS licenses + virtualization license e.g. VMware.

Reduces server hardware + OS licenses. Need workload management software or careful configuration to ensure workloads do not negatively impact each other.

Example 2: mixed approach

SQL Server 2008 VM considerationsBoth Hyper-V and Virtual Server 2005 are fully supported

Hyper-V highly recommended

3rd party virtualization vendors supported if running Windows Server 2008 – see important notes and supported vendors

Server Virtualization Validation Programhttp://windowsservercatalog.com/svvp.aspx?svvppage=svvp.htm

Support policy for Microsoft SQL Server products that are running in a hardware virtualization environment http://support.microsoft.com/KB/956893

Update/modify monitoring scripts and/or toolsUpdate templates to monitor both host and guest CPUs using new hypervisor specific PerfMon counters

Implement new tools like Microsoft System Center – Virtual Machine Manager

SQL Server 2008 VM considerationsMid/large servers recommended

4-sockets or higher for growth and high speed PCI slots; Blades/compact server not recommended regardless of CPU/RAM capacity

Multiple VMs per machine supportedTested up to 4 VMs with near linear txn/s increaseSingle user DB per VM, moderate workloadsNote increase in host OS resource utilization (memory, CPU)

CPU and memory utilization comparable to host installationsStorage IO performance comparable to host installation

All SQL Server IO tuning principals and best practices applyUse pass-through disks for data/log filesUse fixed sized, pre-allocated disks

SQL Server 2008 VM considerationsNetwork IO performance impact 10-30%

Can be addressed using multiple NIC

CPU load will also increase if network load is high

3rd party virtualization vendors have specific optimization recommendations

Can be highly secure but be aware of new and different security considerationsRisks from VMs/guest OS (often by internal perpetrators)

Hypervisor vulnerability exposes entire system (all VMs)

Patch management for all VMs and hyper-visor (MS Hyper-V)

Monitor intra-VM chatter, activity patterns and event logs (including entries & dates)

AgendaConsolidation reviewVirtualization reviewThe real problemsCommon groundRight solution for the problem

The real problems:Server sprawl

The real problems:Cost of high availability and disaster recovery

Failover Clustering protects entire instance but 1-1 protection usually hard to justify

Can be setup to protect multiple databases in the same instanceBuild 3-4 node clusters to reduce cost of protection per nodeIncreases complexity

Database mirroring only protects user databases and requires individual effort

Scripting helps, a littleMethods and processes are kept in the senior DBA’s headUp to 2x the administration overhead

Database Mirroring

Failover Cluster

AvailableServer

ComputeCapacity

100% --

75% --

50% --

25% --

0% --One App

One ServerWorkload

FY 2002

AvailableServer

ComputeCapacity

100% --

75% --

50% --

25% --

0% --

One App One ServerWorkload

FY2005

As server capacity continues to increase, the one app-one server model will have even lower utilization rates in the future.

Servers capacity designed for peak demands

Typical utilization is a fraction of peak demandPeak utilization occurs at specific periods

Slow to respond to unexpected workload growth

Resource acquisition and provisioning can take hours or days

The real problems:Inefficient resource allocation/utilization

The real problems:Do more with less

AdministrationToo many servers to manage, monitor, patchDeployment and re-hosting takes too much time and effortCan I really use Management Studio? TSQL scripts? Powershell?

SecurityToo many points to secure; too many keys to manageInconsistent standards and strictnessMore than 1 SA owner

InfrastructureRunning out of power, HVAC and DR capacityBlades and small servers are crowding, overloading data centers

AgendaConsolidation reviewVirtualization reviewThe real problemsCommon groundRight solution for the problem

More than just technology

Technology: Tools & infrastructure

Process: Definition/design, governance, continuous improvement

People: Roles & responsibilities, management, skills development & discipline

Financial: TCO/ROI, business caseCulture: Values, internal politics, reluctance to

changeExternal: Regulatory, legal compliance

15%

85%

Tough issues will not be technical!

Challenges

One-application, many servers cultureFunding of new projects owned by BU’s and internal politicsSoftware vendor support and licensingFunding to plan, test, implement and support consolidation, virtualization & workload management technologiesTypically requires updated development, QA and release to production processes and management technologiesIncompatible hardware and OS versions with older applicationsSecurity challengesApplication and system “time” - multiple time zone issuesTraining – staff needs to be trained to support new technologies

Success factors

Ensure executive sponsor is in placeDoes not guarantee success but lack of usually assures failure

Ensure current and accurate IT inventory is in place. If inventory is not part of regular change management, the inventory will become stale very quickly and lose value;Inventory tools gathering HW/SW info only gather about 70% of data required; non-tool related data includes

Server financials (e.g. purchase date/price, annual maintenance, depreciation)Company Business Unit (BU), division and/or department ownersApplication business criticality – typically depends on recovery time objectives (RTO) and recovery point objectives (RPO)Growth expectations for next 18-24monthsApplication comments on dependencies, constraints and interfaces

Success factors

Design hardware and infrastructure for the long termSupport 24-36 months growth without major upgrade

Add components without re-hostingBlades appear attractive but often the wrong answer – rack sprawl

Storage design is criticalKey considerations are IOPS, MB/s and latency, not GB/TB

Prioritize systems design based onBusiness criticalitySecurityManageabilityScalability and performance

Knowledge and process upgradeNew technologies and operational structure

Hard problems

Business criticalityA lot more eggs in one basketHA and DR implications

SecurityUser level separationRole isolationSecurity keys – electronic (e.g. encryption) and physical (access control)

Application/systems designClashes and conflictsTightly coupled systemsHard dependencies – user or infrastructure induced

OperationsServer, instance, database level tasks – overlaps and oversightsSQL Agent jobs complexityResource allocations, monitoring and charge-backs

HardwareBig iron servers vs. commodity server farmStorage design for load, not size

Really hard problems

PeopleWho really owns the new systems?Conflict resolution path?Which (or whose) vendor to keep?Who is SA? Can you trust SA?How long for developers & DBAs to adopt new methods/practices?

Really, really hard problemConsolidation or virtualization?

AgendaConsolidation reviewVirtualization reviewThe real problemsCommon groundRight solution for the problem

Right solution for the problemConsolidation and virtualization both solve similar problems

Server sprawlImprove resource utilization efficiencyBetter control and improve manageabilityReduce overall costs

Despite significant overlap, consolidation does not require virtualization to be successfulBroad implementation of virtualization does not imply automatic consolidation

The right solutionDespite similarities, some key differences

ConsolidationWill always reduce and merge footprint – ratio varies depending on strategy and technology

Includes license, operations, processes, infrastructure and peopleModerately useful for legacy applications supportRequires organizational re-alignment to be successful

VirtualizationMay or may not reduce or merge footprintRequires very careful planning on storage to take advantage of transportability and HA featuresGreat for supporting legacy applicationsRequires new skills and knowledgeCan be minimally intrusive to IT groups

Additional considerations for the right solutionMotivations for consolidation and/or virtualization (summarized)

Reduce Server sprawl – known and unknownCosts – hard and softComplexity

Regain control (at least some sense of it)Improve resource utilization levelsImprove response time

Operations and supportProjects

SQL Azure……Private cloudDoesn’t solve the problems by itself but makes the problems more manageable

Final thoughtsJust native SQL Server & Windows and/or 3rd party

Variants of application layer based virtualizationVariants of hyper-visor based virtualizationResource management Scale-out with middle tier data path multiplexing

Be wary of “solve-all-problems” claims/benefitsDynamically move instances from one host server to another in secondsRe-use existing hardware but with improved utilization levelsNo application change

Free lunch…… with every bridge purchasedIn our experience, SQL Server & Windows is adequate in most deployments

You may need some help in large scale management

Case study 1 – national retail chainOrganization overview

$1.4 billion revenue550 store locations20% annual business growth rate

Business issuesPoor service levelsReduce business riskInconsistent server utilizationNeeded architecture for growth

Case study 1 – national retail chainOriginal environment

40 IBM xSeries servers with 2 to 16 single core processorsAnnual hardware support costs - $120,000Annual software support costs - $550,000IT server administration staff – 6 FTEsTotal annual server operating expenses - $1,250,000

Business needsIncrease available computing powerImprove service levelsReduce management burdenEstablish architecture for growth

Case study 1 – national retail chain“Low cost” option

17 commodity servers – 4 dual core processors – 16 GB memory68 total processors, 272 total GB memory

Initial hardware purchase price - $395,138Initial software licenses - $1,917,464

Enterprise servers option3 enterprise servers – 16 dual core processors – 64 GB memory

48 total processors, 192 total GB memoryInitial hardware purchase price – $916,154Initial software licenses - $1,295,952

Sample three year TCO comparison

Three Year TCO Comparison

Current Environment

Small/medium servers solution

Enterprise servers solution

Server Hardware $639,387 $504,474 $1,259,001

Server Software $2,268,162 $2,748,971 $2,036,085

IT Operations Labor $1,458,216 $956,952 $540,327Facilities(Power & Space) $171,861 $117,591 $55,029

Total $4,537,626 $4,327,988 $3,890,442

Additional significant business benefits:• Improved availability• Improved agility – time to deploy new systems• No “forklift upgrade” (aka re-host) for 24 months

Consolidation trendsData from 4 cases – various industries

Typically start with dozens to hundreds of 32-bit servers

Commodity servers based design

1:2 to 1:8 server reduction ratio

Enterprise servers based design

1:10 to 1:64 server reduction ratio

Enterprise server base design does not fall back into “server sprawl” problem due to scalability limits

Case study 2: international petro-chemical company

Challenges with management, scalability, performance, DB growth (size & number), limited staffConcerned with availability and recoverabilityInitially decided on small, commodity x64 servers (1-step up from blades)

No requirements for >8cores in the next 3 yearsNo highly complex applicationsNo VLDBLow entry cost

Case study 2: international petro-chemical company

New concerns 6-months after starting consolidationSystem availability, manageabilityUncertainty over “newly discovered” SQL Server BI/OLAPLimited options on consolidationMinor reduction in data center footprint; reduced consolidation ROIMinor reduction in number of servers; reduced estimated savings from operations

Case study 3: international services company

ChallengesUncontrolled database deployments (including under desks)

DBA team cannot keep up with tracking, managing and patching systems

Security risks, business risks and customer data liabilities

Long evaluation cycle resulted in decision to deploy scale-out SQL Server farm using 3rd party virtualization technology

Features and benefits were very attractive on paper and during POC – moving systems around, HA benefits, rapid growth, reuse existing hardware

Case study 3: international services company

About halfway through deploymentManagement efforts mostly the same but complexity increased

Marginal licensing savings

Limited hardware reuse

Instance portability not as easy as initially expected

Full rollback after about 50% deployment

Re-architected native consolidation based on enterprise servers

SummaryConsolidation and virtualization are both strategic and offer valueOne does not require or preclude the otherSolution must consider growth for next 2-3 years – re-hosting is very expensiveTechnology issues can be challenging usually solvable; people issues aren’t always soAnalysis and design should make up >50% of your effortIf at all possible target SQL Server 2008; at the minimum SQL Server 2005 – older versions only if maintaining legacy apps

ResourcesSQL Server consolidation guidance by the Microsoft SQL CAT

http://sqlcat.com/whitepapers/archive/2010/02/04/sql-server-consolidation-guidance.aspx Server consolidation with SQL Server 2008 whitepaper

http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/9/D/69D1FEA7-5B42-437A-B3BA-A4AD13E34EF6/SQLServer2008Consolidation.docx

SQL Server 2008 virtualization using Hyper-Vhttp://sqlcat.com/whitepapers/archive/2008/10/03/running-sql-server-2008-in-a-hyper-v-environment-best-practices-and-performance-recommendations.aspx

Support Policies of SQL Server in virtualized environments http://support.microsoft.com/?id=956893http://blogs.msdn.com/psssql/archive/2008/10/08/sql-server-support-in-a-hardware-virtualization-environment.aspx

Windows Server Virtualization Validation Program (SVVP)http://windowsservercatalog.com/svvp.aspx?svvppage=svvp.htm

Microsoft Assessment and Planning Toolkit• http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/solutionaccelerators/dd537566.aspx SQL Server 2008 virtualization features, technical & licensing information

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlserver/cc895483.aspxhttp://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/virtualization.aspx

Track Resources

Resource 1

Resource 2

Resource 3

Resource 4

PowerPoint GuidelinesFont, size, and color for text have been formatted for you in the Slide MasterThis template uses Calibri, a standard Windows Vista/7 and Office 2007/2010 fontUse the color palette shown below

SAMPLE FILLSAMPLE FILL SAMPLE FILL

Sample Fill

Sample Fill

Sample FillSample Fill

Sample Fill

Sample Fill Sample Fill

Sample FillSample Fill

Sample Fill

Primary Secondary

PowerPoint TemplateSubtitle color

Example of a slide with a subheadSet the slide title in “All Caps”Set subheads in “Sentence case”Generally set subhead to 28pt or smaller so it will fit on a single lineThe subhead color is defined for this template but must be selected; In PowerPoint 2007, it is the sixth font color from the left

Hyperlink color: www.microsoft.com

Slide for Showing Software CodeUse this layout to show software code

The font is Consolas, a monospace fontThe slide doesn’t use bullets but levels can be indented using the “Increase List Level” icon on the Home menu

Table Format

Table TitleColumn 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Demo TitleNameTitleCompany

DEMO

DAT Track Scratch 2 Win

Find the DAT Track Surface Table in the Yellow Section of the TLCTry your luck to win a Zune HDSimply scratch the game pieces on the DAT Track Surface Table and Match 3 Zune HDs to win

Resources

www.microsoft.com/teched

Sessions On-Demand & Community Microsoft Certification & Training Resources

Resources for IT Professionals Resources for Developers

www.microsoft.com/learning

http://microsoft.com/technet http://microsoft.com/msdn

Learning

Complete an evaluation on CommNet and enter to win!

Sign up for Tech·Ed 2011 and save $500 starting June 8 – June 31st

http://northamerica.msteched.com/registration

You can also register at the

North America 2011 kiosk located at registrationJoin us in Atlanta next year

© 2010 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries.The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to

be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.

JUNE 7-10, 2010 | NEW ORLEANS, LA