VMware vSphere 8 Update 3: Initial Availability

Den senaste uppdateringen av VMware vSphere, version 8 Update 3, har nu officiellt nått sin initiala Availability. Denna uppdatering lovar att leverera förbättrad prestanda, säkerhet och hanteringsfunktioner som gör det enklare för organisationer att driva och säkra sina applikationer både i molnet och på plats. Här är en sammanfattning av vad du kan förvänta dig av denna uppdatering.

Förbättrad Prestanda och Effektivitet

vSphere 8 U3 har introducerat flera nya funktioner som syftar till att superladda arbetsbelastningarnas prestanda och förbättra driftseffektiviteten. Några av de mest framstående förbättringarna inkluderar:

  1. Heterogena vGPU-profiler: Administratörer kan nu tilldela olika typer av applikationer till samma fysiska GPU, vilket minskar kostnader och förbättrar GPU-användningen.
  2. Förbättringar i Skyline Health Diagnostics: Integrering med vCenter gör det möjligt för administratörer att enkelt diagnostisera och lösa problem utan att behöva kontakta supporten, vilket sparar tid och ökar tillgängligheten​(VMware Blogs)​​ (VMware Blogs)​.

Säkerhetsförbättringar

Säkerheten i vSphere 8 U3 har också förstärkts med flera nya funktioner:

  1. Okta Federated Identity Management: Utökat stöd för Okta gör att administratörer kan logga in på både vCenter och NSX Manager med en enda autentisering, vilket ökar både effektivitet och säkerhet.
  2. Stöd för Fault Tolerance med vTPM: Säkerställer kontinuerlig tillgänglighet för virtuella maskiner som använder vTPM-moduler, vilket är avgörande för verksamhetskritiska miljöer​ (The Cloud Platform Tech Zone)​​ (VMware Blogs)​.

Nyheter inom Livscykelhantering

Livscykelhantering har också förbättrats i denna uppdatering med snabbare uppdateringar och mindre driftstopp:

  1. Quick Boot med TPM 2.0: Nu kan TPM 2.0 användas utan att behöva inaktiveras för Quick Boot, vilket minskar tiden för uppdateringar och eliminerar säkerhetsluckor under processen​ (VMware Blogs)​.

Slutord

vSphere 8 U3 representerar ett stort steg framåt för VMware med fokus på att förbättra prestanda, säkerhet och driftseffektivitet. Med dessa uppdateringar kan organisationer dra nytta av en stabilare och mer effektiv IT-infrastruktur, vilket stödjer både traditionella och moderna applikationer. För mer detaljerad information och för att ladda ner uppdateringen, besök VMwares officiella blogg och dokumentationssida​ (VMware Blogs)​​ (The Cloud Platform Tech Zone)​​ (VMware Blogs)​.

Förstå skillnaden mellan VMware vSphere 8.0 och VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1

När det kommer till virtualiserings- och molnteknologi är VMware en ledande aktör med produkter som VMware vSphere 8.0 och VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1. Trots att båda dessa produkter syftar till att optimera IT-infrastrukturer, tjänar de olika syften och erbjuder unika funktioner. I detta blogginlägg utforskar vi de grundläggande skillnaderna mellan vSphere 8.0 och Cloud Foundation 5.1, med fokus på tekniska, operationella och licensmässiga aspekter.

Tekniska skillnader

VMware vSphere 8.0:

  • Virtualisering: vSphere 8.0 är en plattform som huvudsakligen används för servervirtualisering. Det erbjuder kraftfulla verktyg för att skapa och hantera virtuella maskiner (VM).
  • Hypervisor: Inkluderar den senaste versionen av ESXi-hypervisorn, som erbjuder förbättrad prestanda och säkerhet.
  • Funktioner: Stöd för Kubernetes och avancerade säkerhetsfunktioner med vSphere Trust Authority.
  • Skalbarhet: Passar bäst för organisationer som vill virtualisera sin serverinfrastruktur och som behöver en robust och skalbar lösning för att hantera sina virtuella maskiner.

VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1:

  • Integrerad Plattform: Cloud Foundation är en integrerad hybridmolnplattform som kombinerar vSphere, vSAN, NSX och vRealize Suite.
  • Automatisering: Erbjuder automatiserade livscykelhantering och orkestrering av hela datacenterstacken.
  • Molnberedskap: Designad för att skapa en konsistent infrastruktur och drift över privata och offentliga moln.
  • Funktioner: Full stack HCI (Hyper-Converged Infrastructure), molntjänstintegration, och inbyggt stöd för moderna applikationer med Kubernetes och Tanzu.

Operationella skillnader

VMware vSphere 8.0:

  • Hantering: Kräver ofta manuell hantering och konfiguration, även om vissa automatiseringsverktyg finns tillgängliga.
  • Uppdateringar och Underhåll: Uppdateringar och patchar måste hanteras individuellt för varje komponent (t.ex. ESXi, vCenter).
  • Implementering: Idealisk för företag som söker en stabil och högpresterande virtualiseringsplattform utan att nödvändigtvis behöva full molnintegration.

VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1:

  • Hantering: Erbjuder en centraliserad hantering med SDDC Manager, som förenklar drift och underhåll.
  • Uppdateringar och Underhåll: Automatiserad livscykelhantering gör uppdateringar och patchning enklare och mer pålitlig.
  • Implementering: Perfekt för organisationer som vill skapa en hybridmolnmiljö med sömlös integration mellan olika molnplattformar och som vill utnyttja full stack HCI.

Licensmässiga skillnader

VMware vSphere 8.0:

  • Licensiering: Licenseras per processor. Några olilka licensnivåer finns tillgängliga, beroende på funktioner och supportbehov.
  • Kostnad: Kan vara mer kostnadseffektivt för mindre installationer eller organisationer som endast behöver grundläggande virtualisering.

VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1:

  • Licensiering: Licenseras som en hel plattform, vilket inkluderar alla komponenter (vSphere, vSAN, NSX, vRealize). Detta gör det mer omfattande men också potentiellt dyrare.
  • Kostnad: Inkluderar kostnader för full stack-lösningen och kan innebära en högre initial investering, men erbjuder större värde för organisationer som behöver en integrerad och automatiserad molnplattform.

Sammanfattning

VMware vSphere 8.0 och VMware Cloud Foundation 5.1 är båda kraftfulla verktyg men tjänar olika behov. vSphere 8.0 är idealiskt för traditionell servervirtualisering med hög prestanda och skalbarhet. Cloud Foundation 5.1, å andra sidan, erbjuder en fullständig integrerad lösning för hybridmolnmiljöer, med avancerade automatiserings- och hanteringsfunktioner.

Att välja mellan dessa beror på din organisations specifika krav och framtida strategi. För en stabil och högpresterande virtualiseringsplattform är vSphere 8.0 ett utmärkt val, medan Cloud Foundation 5.1 passar bäst för dem som strävar efter att implementera en helhetslösning för molnintegration och automatisering.

För mer detaljer och vägledning, besök VMwares officiella webbplats.

PowerShell for the win!

Who doesn’t love PowerShell and PoweCLI? I use it to automate as much as I can. Building demo environments, upgrading stuff or just playing around. The list is just a few examples of available modules from the Microsoft PowerShell Gallery, you can spend hours exploring interesting modules there. The list below is mostly a reminder for myself but feel free to explore!

VMware

vSphere

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Vester/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/vDocumentation/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Get-VMotion/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/createsnapshots/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/VMW_RemoveOldSnapshots/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Virten.net.VimAutomation/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/install-vmwworkstation/

 

vRA

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/UMN-VMWareRA/

 

vCloud

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Invoke-vCloud/

 

NSX

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PowerNSX/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/TestNBPNSX/

 

Log Insight

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/LogInsight/

Veeam

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Get-VeeamBackupReport/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Set-VeeamBackupWindowOptions/

 

Pure Storage

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PureStoragePowerShellToolkit/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PureStoragePowerShellSDK/

Amazon Web Services

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/AWSPowerShell/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/AWSPowerShell.NetCore/

Dell

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/DellBIOSProvider/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/DellWarranty/

Övrigt

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/WinSCP/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/SSH/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Posh-SSH/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/TreeSize/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PowershellBGInfo/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Tesla/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Ravello/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Telldus/

https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PSSpotify/

In 5 minutes: VMware ROBO

Continuing the “In 5 minutes”-series with a discussion relating more to licenses than technology. A talk about licensing remote offices and branch offices for use with vSphere, vSAN and NSX.

Swedish only.

 

A new series: How and why – Starting with VMware vSAN

I’ve been thinking about creating and sharing short (no more than say 30 minutes) videos of how certain functions or features works and how to set it up. I’m going to create a series of video content that might be useful over the next few week. I’ve decided to name the series “how and why” since this is the angle I’m taking – how do you setup the feature and whats the benefit of actually using the feature.

So the inaugural video will be based on VMware vSAN. Feel free to drop me tweet on future videos you’d like to see.

The video is in swedish only at the moment.

(Re)claim your space!

In one of my previous posts, Is Bitlooker from Veeam a game-changer?, I wrote about the benefits of using Bitlooker for backup jobs when using Veeam Backup & Replication v9.x however Bitlooker is a feature that is not only available for backup jobs – you can use it for replication jobs as well.

So I thought it’d be fun to see what difference, if any, it makes. The goal of my tests is to figure out the most effective way of copying/replicating a VM from one host to another.

The set up for the test:

A virtual machine is installed with Windows Server 2016 standard edition. 100 GB disk assigned to the VM, thin provisioned. The disk is then filled with files (a bunch of iso-files of different sizes). That’s the baseline, then roughly 85 GB will be deleted (all the added iso-files) – then trashcan will be emptied. So we’ll have some blocks containing stale/old data, the blocks are marked as available to be reused from the operating system point of view but they haven’t been zeroed out so from any hypervisor (outside the VM) it just looks as any other block containing data.

Operating system installed (Windows Server 2016) and updated. The VM now consumes 13,5 GB worth of storage.

Then a bunch of files were added (almost) filling the entire disk.

From the vSphere side of it:

At this point the just added files were removed and trashcan emptied.

And from vSphere:

Now the command ‘ls’ will not show the actual size, so ‘du’ can be used instead to see the actual size of the vmdk file:

I’m going to test 4 different scenarios:

  1.  Migrate the VM from one host to another offline (VM will be shutdown).
  2. Replicating the virtual machine with VMware vSphere Replication 6.5.
  3. Replicating the virtual machine with Veeam Backup & Replication without Bitlooker enabled.
  4. Replicating the virtual machine with Veeam Bitlooker enabled.

The thesis, or point to prove, is that test 1-3 will have no or little impact on the size of the vmdk file however – magic will happen on test 4. So lets perform the tests and find out for real!

Test 1:

VM moved to another host while offline and now let’s explore what can be seen using different methods.

Inside the VM:

From the host:

So no change in vmdk file size as expected.

Test 2:

The virtual machine will be replicated to another host using VMware vSphere Replication 6.5.

VMware vSphere has been configured using the following settings:

Not alot of settings, in fact, the above settings will have no impact on the vmdk size. They will only have control how the snapshot on the VM will be generated (crash consistent vs consistent backup) and the impact the replication job will have on the network.

Inside the VM:

From the host:

Since ‘ls’ doesn’t show the actual size on a thin disk, disk usage ‘du’ is used instead:

So no change in vmdk file size as expected.

Test 3:

The virtual machine is replicated to another host using Veeam Backup & Replication v9.5.

Replication from a Veeam perspective has been set up, to make a fair comparison to the VMware replication test (test 2), the Veeam job will not use exclude swap file blocks:

Processed and read data in the picture below tells us that Veeam doesn’t know the difference between blocks in use and blocks marked as deleted (the same applies for almost all backup vendors):

Inside the VM:

From the host:

And using ‘du’:

So no change in vmdk file size as expected.

 

Test 4:

Know time for the fun stuff. The virtual machine will be replicated to another host using Veeam Backup & Replication v9.5. We will use both space saving techniques we can enable on the job (with application-aware processing we can also exclude specific files, folders, file extensions but we’re not using that feature in this test)

Now, this is the magic we were looking for! The  proxy server has processed all of the data but it has only read data that contain used blocks!

From the VM:

From the host:

Now the vSphere web client combine the .vmdk and -flat.vmdk file into one (like it’s done forever):

And the disk usage utility shows:

Yikes! That’s cool stuff!

Conclusion:

Bitlooker is a feature you should have enabled on any relevant job. It certainly can be used to reclaim that precious storage space you so desperately need.  Heck, why no use it as part of your normal failover testing, cause you’ll already doing that right? Once a month (or how often you feel appropriate) do a planned failover using Veeam Backup & Replication, verify that you DR plan works and as an added bonus you reclaim disk space in the process!

And yet another benefit is the spent replicating the virtual machine, without Bitlooker it took 30 minutes to replicate the VM from one host to another but it was just shy of 7 minutes with Bitlooker enabled.

So seriously, why are you not using this magic thing? There’s only one drawback, Bitlooker supports only NTFS file system (=Windows VMs).

The unsung heroes of DRS in vSphere 6.5

VMware vSphere 6.5 has been out for a while now. Some features didn’t get as much publicity as it should, at least in my mind. A few of the really cool features that were introduced in vSphere 6.5 related to DRS, opening up for additional configuration and control of your cluster and virtual machines. It’s found under DRS settings and is called ”Additional Options” where you’ll see 3 new settings:

  • VM distribution

Under normal circumstances DRS will load balance VMs so each virtual machine has the resources it requires, taking into account the cost of vMotioning workloads around to new hosts (as a side note, CPU and RAM has been used since inception of DRS but now it’s also network aware) as one decision-making parameter. This will result in a cluster where you normally won’t see an exact split/distribution/load balancing of the virtual machines cross the hosts, some hosts may be running more VMs than the others. That’s not a problem since the VMs have the resources they need, they are not starved for resources, but the user perception of the DRS functionality is that VMs will be split equally across all hosts. One concern that might require some rethinking of that approach is availability, what if the host running the majority of VMs crash? HA will certainly restart the VMs but a lot of services will be impacted in the environment – Enter VM distribution!

The purpose of VM distribution is to have a fair distribution of VMs on your hosts. Or as it says on one of the official VMware blogs: ”This will cause DRS to spread the count of the VMs evenly across the hosts.”

However, DRS will always prioritize load balancing over the VM spread, so even distribution of VMs is done on a best-effort basis.

 

  • Memory Metric for Load Balancing

DRS will mainly consider active memory when load balancing, as opposed to consumed or granted memory to VMs. DRS will also take some overhead memory into consideration, so it will use active memory + a 25 % overhead as its primary metric. Active memory is a ”mathematical model that was created in which the hypervisor statistically estimates what Active memory is for a virtual machine by use of a random sampling and some very smart math.  Due diligence was done at the time this was designed to prove the estimation model did represent real life.  So, while it is an estimate, we should not be concerned about its accuracy.”

A really good read on the subject, and where the quote above came from, is “Understanding vSphere Active Memory”.

Now it’s possible to change what memory metric that is used when load balancing, instead of active memory we can use consumed memory. And by the way, the definition of consumed memory: ”Amount of guest physical memory consumed by the virtual machine for guest memory. Consumed memory does not include overhead memory. It includes shared memory and memory that might be reserved, but not actually used.

Virtual machine consumed memory = memory granted – memory saved due to memory sharing” – Quote from “Memory Performance Counters – An Evolved Look at Memory Management”.

This option is equivalent to setting the existing cluster advanced option PercentIdleMBInMemDemand with a value of 100.

 

  • CPU Over-Commitment

It’s now possible to enforce a specific level of overcommit of vCPU to pCPU resources in the cluster, if you only want to allow 4 virtual CPUs per physical core in your cluster you can now have it configured and enforced by the cluster. When the cluster runs out of pCPU resources you won’t be able to power on any more virtual machines. You define a percentage of over commitment of the entire cluster, setting it from 0 % (= no over commitment allowed or put in another way: 1 vCPU = 1 pCPU) up to 500 %.