Following our launch of the new 13G-based XC series platform, I present our product architectures for the VDI-specific use cases. Of the platforms available, this use case is focused on the extremely powerful 1U XC630 with Haswell CPUs and 2133MHz RAM. We offer these appliances on both Server 2012 R2 Hyper-V and vSphere 5.5 U2 with Citrix XenDesktop, VMware Horizon View, or Dell vWorkspace.  All platform architectures have been optimized, configured for best performance and documented.

Platforms

We have three platforms to choose from optimized around cost and performance, all being ultimately flexible should specific parameters need to change. The A5 model is the most cost effective leveraging 8-core CPUs, 256GB RAM 2 x 200GB SSDs for performance and 4 x 1TB HDDs for capacity.  For POCs, small deployments or light application virtualization, this platform is well suited. The B5 model steps up the performance by adding four cores per socket, increasing the RAM density to 384GB and doubling the performance tier to 2 x 400GB SSDs. This platform will provide the best bang for the buck on medium density deployments of light or medium level workloads. The B7 is the top of the line offering 16-core CPUs and a higher capacity tier of 6 x 1TB HDDs. For deployments requiring maximum density of knowledge or power user workloads, this is the platform for you.

At 1U with dual CPUs, 24 DIMM slots and 10 drive bays…loads of potential and flexibility!

Solution Architecture

Utilizing 3 platform hardware configurations, we are offering 3 VDI solutions on 2 hypervisors. Lots of flexibility and many options. 3 node cluster minimum is required with every node containing a Nutanix Controller VM (CVM) to handle all IO. The SATADOM is present for boot responsibilities to host the hypervisor as well as initial setup of the Nutanix Home area. The SSDs and NL SAS disks are passed through directly to each CVM which straddle the hypervisor and hardware. Every CVM contributes its directly-attached disks to the storage pool which is stretched across all nodes in the Nutanix Distributed File System (NDFS) cluster. NDFS is not dependent on the hypervisor for HA or clustering. Hyper-V cluster storage pools will present SMB version 3 to the hosts and vSphere clusters will be presented with NFS. Containers can be created within the storage pool to logically separate VMs based on function. These containers also provide isolation of configurable storage characteristics in the form of dedupe and compression. In other words, you can enable compression on your management VMs within their dedicated container, but not on your VDI desktops, also within their own container. The namespace is presented to the cluster in the form of \\NDFS_Cluster_name\container_name.

The first solution I’ll cover is Dell’s Wyse vWorkspace which supports either 2012 R2 Hyper-V or vSphere 5.5. For small deployments or POCs we offer this solution in a “floating mgmt” architecture which combines the vWorkspace infrastructure management roles and VDI desktops or shared session VMs. vWorkspace and Hyper-V enables a special technology for non-persistent/ shared image desktops called Hyper-V Catalyst which includes 2 components: HyperCache and HyperDeploy. Hyper-V Catalyst provides some incredible performance boosts and requires that the vWorkspace infrastructure components communicate directly with the hyper-V hypervisor. This also means that vWorkspace does not require SCVMM to perform provisioning tasks for non-persistent desktops!

• HyperCache – Provides virtual desktop performance enhancement by caching parent VHDs in host RAM. Read requests are satisfied from cache including requests from all subsequent child VMs.
• HyperDeploy – Provides instant cloning of parent VHDs massively diminishing virtual desktop pool deployment times.

You’ll notice the HyperCache components included on the Hyper-V architectures below. 3 to 6 hosts in the floating management model, depicted below with management, desktops and RDSH VMs logically separated only from a storage container perspective by function. The recommendation of 3-7 RDSH VMs is based our work optimizing around NUMA boundaries. I’ll dive deeper into that in an upcoming post. The B7 platform is used in the architectures below.

Above ~1000 users we recommend the traditional distributed management architecture to enable more predictable scaling and performance of both the compute and management hosts. The same basic architecture is the same and scales to the full extent supported by the hypervisor, is this case Hyper-V which supports up to 64 hosts. NDFS does not have a scaling limitation so several hypervisor clusters can be built within a single contiguous NDFS namespace. Our recommendation is to then build independent Failover Clusters for compute and management discretely so they can scale up or out independently.

The architecture below depicts a B7 build on Hyper-V applicable to Citrix XenDesktop or Wyse vWorkspace.

This architecture is relatively similar for Wyse vWorkspace or VMware Horizon View on vSphere 5.5 U2 but fewer total compute hosts per HA cluster, 32 total. For vWorkspace, Hyper-V Catalyst is not present in this scenario so vCenter is required to perform desktop provisioning tasks.

For the storage containers, the best practice of less is more still stands. If you don’t need a particular feature don’t enable it, as it will consume additional resources. Deduplication is always recommended on the performance tier since the primary OpLog lives on SSD and will always benefit. Dedupe or compression on the capacity tier is not recommended, of course you absolutely need it. And if you do prepare to increase each CVM RAM allocation to 32GB.

Network Architecture

As a hyperconverged appliance, the network architecture leverages the converged model. A pair of 10Gb NICs minimum in  each node handle all traffic for the hypervisor, guests and storage operations between CVMs. Remember that the storage of all VMs is kept local to the host to which the VM resides, so the only traffic that will traverse the network is LAN and replication. There is no need to isolate storage protocol traffic when using Nutanix. 

Hyper-V and vSphere are functionally similar. For Hyper-V there are 2 vSwitches per host, 1 external that aggregates all of the services of the host management OS as well as the vNICs for the connected VMs. The 10Gb NICs are connected to a LBFO team configured in Dynamic Mode. The CVM alone connects to a private internal vSwitch so it can communicate with the hypervisor.

In vSphere it’s the same story but with the concept of Port Groups and vMotion.

We have tested the various configurations per our standard processes and documented the performance results which can be found in the link below. These docs will be updated as we validate additional configurations.

Product Architectures for 13G XC launch:

http://bit.ly/DellXCLib 

Resources:

About Wyse vWorkspace HyperCache

About Wyse vWorkspace HyperDeploy

SJbWUYl4LRCwFNcatHuG

I am pleased to present the Dell XC 2.0 series of web-scale appliances based on the award-winning 13G PowerEdge server line from Dell. There’s lots more in store for the XC so just focusing on this part of the launch we are introducing the XC630 and the XC730xd appliances.

Flexibility and performance are key tenets of this launch providing not only a choice in 1U or 2U form factors, but an assortment of CPU and disk options. From a solution perspective, specifically around VDI, we are releasing three optimized and validated platforms with accompanied Product Architectures to help you plan and size your Dell XC deployments.

The basic architecture of the Dell XC powered by Nutanix remains the same. Every node is outfitted with a Nutanix Controller VM (CVM) that connects to a mix of SSD and HDD to contribute to a distributed storage pool that has no inherent scaling limitation. Three nodes minimum required and either VMware vSphere or Microsoft Windows Server 2012 R2 Hyper-V are supported hypervisors. Let’s take a look at the new models.

XC630

The XC630 is a 1U dual-socket platform that supports 6-core to 16-core CPUs and up to 24 x 2133MHz 16GB RDIMMs or 32GB LRDIMMs. The XC630 can be configured using all flash or using two tiers of storage which can consist of 2 to 4 x SSDs (200GB, 400GB or 800GB) and 4 to 8 x 1TB HDDs (2TB HDDs coming soon). Flexible! All flash nodes must have a minimum of 6 x SSDs while nodes with two storage tiers must have a minimum of two SSDs and four HDDs. All nodes have a minimum of 2 x 1Gb plus 2 x 10Gb SFP+ or BaseT Ethernet that can be augmented via an additional card.

New to the XC 2.0 series is a 64GB SATADOM that is used to boot each node. Each node is also outfitted with a 16GB SD card used for the purposes of initial deployment and recovery. The SSDs and HDDs that comprise the Nutanix Distributed File System (NDFS) storage pool are presented to each CVM via an on-board 1GB PERC H730 set in pass-through mode. Simple, powerful, flexible.

XC730xd

For deployments requiring a greater amount of cold tier data capacity, the XC730xd can provide up to 32TB raw per node. The XC730xd is a 2U dual-socket platform that supports 6-core to 16-core CPUs and up to 24 x 2133MHz 16GB RDIMMs or 32GB LRDIMMs. The XC730xd is provided with two chassis options: 24 x 2.5” disks or 12 x 3.5” disks. The 24-drive model requires the use of two tiers of storage which can consist of 2 to 4 x SSDs (200GB, 400GB or 800GB) and 4 to 22 x 1TB HDDs .The 12-drive model also requires two tiers of storage consisting of 2 to 4 x SSDs (200, 400GB or 800GB) and up to 10 x 4TB HDDs. All nodes have a minimum of 2 x 1Gb plus 2 x 10Gb SFP+ or BaseT Ethernet that can be augmented via an additional card.

The XC730xd platforms are also outfitted with a 64GB SATADOM that is used to boot the nodes. The 16GB SD card used for the purposes of initial deployment and recovery is present on these models as well. The SSDs and HDDs that comprise the Nutanix Distributed File System (NDFS) storage pool are presented to each CVM via an on-board 1GB PERC H730 set in pass-through mode. Simple, powerful, flexible.

12 drive option, hopefully the overlaps in the image below make sense:

24 drive option:

Nutanix Software Editions

All editions of the Nutanix software platform are available with variable lengths for support and maintenance.

This is just the beginning. Keep an eye out for additional platforms and offerings from the Dell + Nutanix partnership! Next up is the VDI product architectures based on the XC630. Stay tuned!!

http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/dell-xc-series/pd

Hyperconverged Web-scale Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are white hot right now and Nutanix is leading the pack with their ability to support all major hypervisors (vSphere, Hyper-V and KVM) while providing nearly unlimited scale. Dell partnering with Nutanix was an obvious mutually beneficial choice for the reasons above plus supplying a much more robust server platform. Dell also provides a global reach for services and support as well as solving other challenges such as hypervisors installed in the factory.

Nutanix operates below the hypervisor layer so as a result requires a lot of tightly coupled interaction with the hardware directly. Many competing platforms in this space sit above the hypervisor so require vSphere, for example, to provide access to storage and HA but they are also limited by the hypervisor’s limitations (scale).  Nutanix uses its own algorithm for clustering and doesn’t rely on a common transactional database which can cause additional challenges when building solutions that span multiple sites. Because of this the Nutanix Distributed Filesystem (NDFS) supports no known limits of scale. There are current Nutanix installations in the thousands of nodes across a contiguous namespace and now you can build them on Dell hardware.

Along with the Dell XC720xd appliances, we have released a number of complementary workload Product Architectures to help customers and partners build solutions using these new platforms. I’ll discuss the primary architectural elements below.

Wyse Datacenter Appliance Architecture for Citrix

Wyse Datacenter Appliance Architecture for VMware

Wyse Datacenter Appliance Architecture for vWorkspace

Nutanix Architecture

Three nodes minimum are required for NDFS to achieve quorum so that is the minimum solution buy in, then storage and compute capacity can be increased incrementally beyond by adding one or more nodes to an existing cluster. The Nutanix architecture uses a Controller VM (CVM) on each host which participates in the NDFS cluster and manages the hard disks local to its own host. Each host requires two tiers of storage: high performance/ SSD and capacity/ HDD. The CVM manages the reads/writes on each host and automatically tiers the IO across these disks. A key value proposition of the Nutanix model is data locality which means that the data for a given VM running on a given host is stored locally on that host as apposed to having reads and writes crossing the network. This model scales indefinitely in a linear block manner where you simply buy and add capacity as you need it. Nutanix creates a storage pool that is distributed across all hosts in the cluster and presents this pool back to the hypervisor as NFS or SMB.

You can see from the figure below that the CVM engages directly with the SCSI controller through which it accesses the disks local to the host it resides. Since Nutanix sits below the hypervisor and handles its own clustering and data HA, it is not dependent upon the hypervisor to provide any features nor is it limited by any related limitations.

From a storage management and feature perspective, Nutanix provides two tiers of optional deduplication performed locally on each host (SSD and HDD individually), compression, tunable replication (number of copies of each write spread across disparate nodes in the cluster) and data locality (keeps data local to the node the VM lives on). Within a storage pool, containers are created to logically group VMs stored within the namespace and enable specific storage features such as replication factor and dedupe. Best practice says that a single storage pool spread across all disks is sufficient but multiple containers can be used. The image below shows an example large scale XC-based cluster with a single storage pool and multiple containers.

While the Nutanix architecture can theoretically scale indefinitely, practicality might dictate that you design your clusters around the boundaries of the hypervisors, 32 nodes for vSphere, 64 nodes for Hyper-v. The decision to do this will be more financially impactful if you separate your resources along the lines of compute and management in distinct SDS clusters. You could also, optionally, install many maximum node hypervisor clusters within a single very large, contiguous Nutanix namespace, which is fully supported. I’ll discuss the former option below as part of our recommended pod architecture.

Dell XC720xd platforms

For our phase 1 launch we have five platforms to offer that vary in CPU, RAM and size/ quantity of disks. Each appliance is 2U, based on the 3.5” 12-gen PowerEdge R720XD and supports from 5 to 12 total disks, each a mix of SSD and HDD. The A5 platform is the smallest with a pair of 6-core CPUs, 200GB SSDs and a recommended 256GB RAM. The B5 and B7 models are almost identical except for the 8-core CPU on the B5 and the 10-core CPU on the B7. The C5 and C7 boast a slightly higher clocked 10-core CPU with doubled SSD densities and 4-5x more in the capacity tier. The suggested workloads are specific with the first three targeted at VDI customers. If greater capacity is required, the C5 and C7 models work very well for this purpose too.

For workload to platform sizing guidance, we make the following recommendations:

Here is a view of the 12G-based platform representing the A5-B7 models. The C5 and C7 would add additional disks in the second disk bay. The two disks in the rear flexbay are 160GB SSDs configured in RAID1 via PERC used to host the hypervisor and CVM, these disks do not participate in the storage pool. The six disks in front are controlled by the CVM directly via the LSI controller and contribute to the distributed storage pool across all nodes.

Dell XC Pod Architecture

This being a 10Gb hyperconverged architecture, the leaf/ spine network model is recommended. We do recommend a 1Gb switch stack for iDRAC/ IPMI traffic and build the leaf layer from 10Gb Force10 parts. The S4810 is shown in the graphic below which is recommended for SFP+ based platforms or the S4820T can be used for 10GBase-T.

In our XC series product architecture, the compute, management and storage layers, typically all separated, are combined here into a single appliance. For solutions based on vWorkspace under 10 nodes, we recommend a “floating management” architecture which allows the server infrastructure VMs to move between hosts also being used for desktop VMs or RDSH sessions. You’ll notice in the graphics below that compute and management are combined into a single hypervisor cluster which hosts both of these functions.

Hyper-V is shown below which means the CVMs present the SMBv3 protocol to the storage pool. We recommend three basic containers to separate infrastructure mgmt, desktop VMs and RDSH VMs. We recommend the following feature attributes based on these three containers (It is not supported to enable compression and deduplication on the same container):

You’ll notice that I’ve included the resource requirements for the Nutanix CVMs (8 x vCPUs, 32GB vRAM). The vRAM allocation can vary depending on the features you enable within your SDS cluster. 32GB is required, for example, if you intend to enable both SSD and HDD deduplication. If you only require SSD deduplication and leave the HDD tier turned off, you can reduce your CVM vRAM allocation to 16GB. We highly recommend that you disable any features that you do not need or do not intend to use!

For vWorkspace solutions over 1000 users or solutions based on VMware Horizon or Citrix XenDesktop, we recommend separating the infrastructure management in all cases. This allows management infrastructure to run in its own dedicated hypervisor cluster while providing very clear and predictable compute capacity for the compute cluster. The graphic below depicts a 1000-6000 user architecture based on vWorkspace on Hyper-V. Notice that the SMB namespace is stretched across both of the discrete compute and management infrastructure clusters, each scaling independently. You could optionally build dedicated SDS clusters for compute and management if you desire, but remember the three node minimum, which would raise your minimum build to 6 nodes in this scenario.

XenDesktop on vSphere, up to 32 nodes max per cluster, supporting around 2500 users in this architecture:

Horizon View on vSphere, up to 32 nodes max per cluster. supporting around 1700 users in this architecture:

Network Architecture

Following the leaf/ spine model, each node should connect 2 x 10Gb ports to a leaf switch which are then fully mesh connected to an upstream set of spine switches.

On each host there are two virtual switches: one for external access to the LAN and internode communication and one private internal vSwitch used for the CVM alone. On Hyper-V the two NICs are configured in a LBFO team on each host with all management OS vNICs connected to it.

vSphere follows the same basic model except for port groups configured for the VM type and VMKernel ports configured for host functions:

Performance results

The tables below summarize the user densities observed for each platform during our testing. Please refer to the product architectures linked at the beginning of this post for the detailed performance results for each solution.

Resources:

http://en.community.dell.com/dell-blogs/direct2dell/b/direct2dell/archive/2014/11/05/dell-world-two-questions-cloud-client-computing

http://blogs.citrix.com/2014/11/07/dell-launches-new-appliance-solution-for-desktop-virtualization/

http://blogs.citrix.com/2014/11/10/xendesktop-technologies-introduced-as-a-new-dell-wyse-datacenter-appliance-architecture/

http://blogs.vmware.com/euc/2014/11/vmware-horizon-6-dell-xc-delivering-new-economics-simplicity-desktop-application-virtualization.html

http://stevenpoitras.com/the-nutanix-bible/

http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/dell-xc-series/pd

That’s a mouthful! Here’s a quick taste of the new Dell + Nutanix appliance we’ve been working on.  Our full solution offering will be released soon, stay tuned. In the meantime, the Dell marketing folks put together a very sexy video:

Rumors on the future of Google Voice (gVoice) have been abound for well over a year now, with most indications pointing to an eventual consolidation with the G+ Hangouts app, that could be announced at Google I/O soon. As of yesterday 5/15/14, the long awaited closing of the gVoice API (XMPP) to 3rd parties has happened or soon will in the next few days. snrb Labs, creators of Android VOIP stalwart app GrooVe IP, has been warning about this shift for a long time and as of yesterday no longer supports gVoice users. GrooVe IP formerly integrated with the gVoice service via XMPP allowing users to make outbound voice calls over cellular data plans or wifi service using gVoice phone numbers, thus conserving cellular minutes. This is appealing for obvious reasons and delivers on the core value proposition of VOIP. There is also the slightly more complicated SIP client method that requires a bit more setup and has more moving parts on the backend. Any XMPP integration is now dead there too, however.

gVoice has had a good run

Despite the ability to make free calls over VOIP via 3rd-party app integration, gVoice in its current state has a host of other useful features, albeit mostly for inbound calls.

• Cellular voicemail integration/ replacement – in my phone, instead of using Verizon for vmail service, gVoice captures the messages which are then (somewhat poorly) transcripted to text and emailed to me along with a flash audio file. I can play any message from my phone via the voice app, via email or /voice site on any PC. No dialing into a legacy central voicemail service to get messages.

• Multi-ring – gVoice allows users to specify multiple end points to route incoming calls. I could have my cell, my wife’s cell and the house phone all ring when anyone calls my gVoice number.

• Call screening/ blocking – gVoice provides a great buffer and allows you to obfuscate your “real” phone number. Any caller that comes in via my gVoice number must first announce themselves, then I have the option to accept the call, send them straight to vmail, or listen to them live while they leave a message and pick up during if I choose. Just like old-school answering machine screening. You can also permanently block any caller that comes in via the service through a few creative means (not in service message).

• SMS consolidation – gVoice supports in/outbound text messaging too which comes with the same benefits as voice calls in that they show up on your phone and in email. With gmail integration, you can simply reply to a gVoice text message from email and the recipient will get the text message on their device.
• Caller Rules – Another great feature of gVoice allows users to specify calling rules based on the caller profile. If they’re in your contacts list you could: ring all phones, use a personal greeting and don’t screen. If anonymous: ring only mobile, use a generic greeting and screen. Lots of options and customizable possibilities here.

This is the end

Is the end near for gVoice? I certainly hope not, as outbound VOIP calling was far from one of the most useful features I enjoy. Google is an advertising company, first and foremost, and people forget that. Yes they are extremely profitable and lead some of the best innovation of the day, but you have to consider why Google invests in the technology it does. gVoice came out before Google’s speech-to-text initiative, which clearly benefitted from the work done and data collected in gVoice. It was possibly why gVoice was created in the first place! Google invests in technologies to bolster its core search business or related offerings. Once that pipeline runs dry it might kill the initiative or integrate it into something else. gVoice fed the core search business helping to bring voice to that space, which is now a core feature in Android fed Google searches (“Ok, Google”). gVoice has served its purpose for Google. The lack of development effort or improvement to gVoice is pretty glaring at this point. The last update to the Android app was almost 8 months ago and google.com/voice hasn’t changed in a very long time.

Google is still betting big on Google+ and the more it can do to attract and retain users in that ecosphere the better. I use Hangouts on my Android devices but I’m still one of the early Google adopter hold-outs who still does not have a G+ profile. I’ll hold out as long as I can but Google is trying very hard to close the loop and slowly force everyone into G+. At some point, if you want to be social at all in any capacity in the Google universe, you will have to have a G+ profile. Why? Laser focused and relevant advertising based on a wide spectrum view of all of your data. Period. The data Google amasses on its users is extremely valuable to advertisers.

So, what is next?

The future of gVoice and its current features is uncertain. A voice-enabled Hangouts app seems inevitable and a logical step for Google to make. Will most of the features I currently use in gVoice disappear at some point? Probably. With XMPP access gone, apps like GrooVe IP have had to find other means to provide their services. GrooVe IP has partnered with ring.to (backed by bandwidth.com) to carry this torch forward. This will require porting your gVoice number to ring.to or generating a new number via GrooVe IP. SMS is not currently supported with the new solution which is a bummer, but GrooVe says it’s coming. The good news is that you can still make free calls using VOIP on your Android device using your gVoice number if you wish. The bad news is that all of the gVoice integration goodness is gone and it will take the 3rd parties a while to get their solutions up to par.