Economic and Environmental Drivers for Virtualization

449
-1

Published on

NCCE 2011
Admin/IT Summit - Virtualization

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
449
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Please send feedback and improvement ideas to the Data Center Science Center – DCSC@apc.com. Thank you! Executive summary of this presentation: By now it ’s foregone conclusion that virtualization adds material value to a company and is here to stay. The point of this presentation is not to educate on virtualization specifically but on the impact virtualization has on a data center’s power and cooling infrastructure. The following items are discussed: Choosing a density strategy; Implementing a high density environment; Maximizing the efficiency benefit; Anticipating the dynamic data center To the presenter: The intent of this presentation is to leave the viewer with these takeaways… I am no longer afraid I will create physical infrastructure problems when virtualizing/consolidating I have to include power and cooling for my efficiency entitlement ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By now it ’s foregone conclusion that virtualization adds material value to a company and is here to stay. The point of this presentation is not to educate on virtualization specifically but on the impact virtualization has on a data center’s power and cooling infrastructure. When implementing virtualization in an existing data center, choosing a density strategy is the single-most important decision. Understanding all density strategies and their consequences allows IT decision makers to extend the life of their existing data center. The trend of increasing rack power density continues but evidence from server vendors suggests that this density will reach a peak of about 30kW / rack. Implementing high density data centers is easy assuming there is sufficient bulk capacity to support power and cooling distribution. Row-based cooling is proving that high density computing is not only easy to implement, but in fact increases data center infrastructure efficiency (DCiE) compared to traditional low-density room-based cooling. Despite the very measurable benefits of virtualization, there is a paradox that demands attention and explanation. Implementing virtualization almost always reduces DCiE. How can such a good “green” practice result in a worse DCiE. This paradox is easily explained by understanding the definition of DCiE and distinguishing DCiE from the notion of IT efficiency which increases after virtualization. The good news is that it is possible to virtualize and increase DCiE at the same time if improvements are made to power and cooling infrastructure. Eventually virtualization will be so prevalent that virtual machine (VM) migration from server to server will yield to migration of entire operations from data center to data center. While this will drastically improve the reliability of computing, it will equally increase the value of managing IT and the power and cooling systems IT relies on.
  • Many of the virtualization myths circulating in the industry are result of loosely used terms and their subsequent interpretation. Four common myths are discussed here. Myth - Virtualization always increases your efficiency . First we need to define what is meant by the term efficiency… Certainly if the term efficiency is defined as the ratio of server compute output to server power input (i.e. MIPS / kW), then efficiency definitely increases due to the higher processor utilization. In other words, virtualization allows more computing to get done with less power. However, if the term efficiency is defined as the ratio of total IT power consumption to total data center power consumption (i.e. DCiE), then efficiency decreases. This is because the IT load decreases more than the accompanying power reduction in the power and cooling systems. The key to improving DCiE is to rightsize the power and cooling, implement best practices, and adopt efficient power and cooling architectures such as row-based cooling and 400V distribution. Myth - Virtualization requires high density . Virtualization does not force IT managers to pack servers into IT enclosures. IT managers can choose three main density strategies or a combination thereof. No one strategy is ideal for every single data center. However, any IT manager who has gone through a virtualization project, can attest to the fact that host servers draw more power per U-height than pre-existing servers. This is due to increased resource requirements such as CPU, memory, and storage. These higher-density host servers have increased power and cooling requirements which must be considered in a density strategy. Myth - Operating at high density is less efficient - can ’t coexist . Running at higher densities and increased efficiency CAN coexist using row-based cooling. Trying to cool high density racks using traditional perimeter air conditioners results in hot spots because this 30+ year cooling architecture was never designed to cool high density racks. Bringing the cooling to where it’s required (in the row) results in smaller fan motors which leads to significantly less electrical power consumption. Myth - I don ’t need to worry about power and cooling when virtualizing . It’s true that there is almost always excess bulk power and cooling capacity when you virtualize (i.e. 4 to 1 consolidation). However, decreases in power and cooling capacity lead to lower data center infrastructure efficiency (DCiE) at best and at worst, it can lead to reliability issues. For example, a lightly loaded chiller may turn itself off in periods of colder outdoor temperatures in order to protect itself against damage. Another example, is the short-cycling of compressors from frequent shutdown, which shortens compressor life. IT managers must plan ahead to ensure that the existing power and cooling architecture can support the density strategy chosen in the short term and long term.
  • Assessing an existing data center ’s power and cooling infrastructure will help to formulate a density strategy that works best for that data center. Assessments can also reveal lightly loaded systems such as chillers which , after virtualization, may turn off in periods of colder outdoor temperatures. Once an assessment is done, IT managers can make educated decisions on power and cooling improvements that will increase data center infrastructure efficiency (DCiE).
  • The purpose of this tool is to illustrate the energy savings resulting from the virtualization of servers within a data center. The tool allows the user to input data regarding data center capacity, load, number of servers, energy cost, and other data center elements. Both the "as is" and "to be" environmental characteristics can be entered as inputs. The tool then compares both environments (pre and post-virtualization) in terms of percentage of savings and also calculates the impact on the annual electrical bill. The overall data center infrastructure efficiency (DCiE) of both environments is compared as is the savings allocation and the space utilization.
  • A density strategy is a plan IT managers have for powering and cooling their critical IT assets now and in the future. Unfortunately, many IT managers unknowingly choose a density strategy by defaulting to whatever density their raised floor can provide. Even if an existing raised floor provides adequate cooling for the short term, it most likely will hinder future IT deployments as server power densities increase. Choosing a density strategy depends largely on four main factors: Whether the data center is existing or a new one is being built The percentage of total servers that are considered high density (3-6 kW / server) The amount of available bulk power and cooling capacity (kW) Whether discretion exists to move IT loads around the data center There are four main density strategies including; spread the load, supplemental cooling, consolidate load in a high density pod, and whole-room high density. It may be that one of these strategies is best for a particular data center but in most cases a data center uses a combination of these strategies as it evolves over time.
  • The following hypothetical case study was created using TradeOff Tool - TT9 Rev 0 “Virtualization Energy Cost Calculator” which illustrates what happens to data center operational costs during a virtualization project that includes power and cooling improvements. Assumption of base data center infrastructure 7kW / rack Room-based cooling with hot aisle/cold aisle CRAC with air-cooled condenser for heat rejection Random placement of perf tiles and no blanking panels Uncoordinated CRACs No cooling economizer No dropped ceiling hot air return plenum 18 ” raised floor with 6” cable obstruction Traditional UPS - 89% efficient at full load Standby generator 12 cents/kW-hr No redundancy 90 kW initial IT load (75% load) 59kW of server loads (66%) Total number of servers 425 Consolidation assumptions: Percentage of servers that can be virtualized: 75% Server consolidation ratio: 20:1 53 kW total post virtualization IT load Assumption of improvements Rightsized power and cooling Scalable high efficiency UPS - 96% efficient at full load Added blanking panels Row-based cooling (no containment)
  • The following hypothetical case study was created using TradeOff Tool - TT9 Rev 0 “Virtualization Energy Cost Calculator” which illustrates what happens to data center operational costs during a virtualization project that includes power and cooling improvements. Assumption of base data center infrastructure 7kW / rack Room-based cooling with hot aisle/cold aisle CRAC with air-cooled condenser for heat rejection Random placement of perf tiles and no blanking panels Uncoordinated CRACs No cooling economizer No dropped ceiling hot air return plenum 18 ” raised floor with 6” cable obstruction Traditional UPS - 89% efficient at full load Standby generator 12 cents/kW-hr No redundancy 90 kW initial IT load (75% load) 59kW of server loads (66%) Total number of servers 425 Consolidation assumptions: Percentage of servers that can be virtualized: 75% Server consolidation ratio: 20:1 53 kW total post virtualization IT load Assumption of improvements Rightsized power and cooling Scalable high efficiency UPS - 96% efficient at full load Added blanking panels Row-based cooling (no containment)
  • The following hypothetical case study was created using TradeOff Tool - TT9 Rev 0 “Virtualization Energy Cost Calculator” which illustrates what happens to data center operational costs during a virtualization project that includes power and cooling improvements. Assumption of base data center infrastructure 7kW / rack Room-based cooling with hot aisle/cold aisle CRAC with air-cooled condenser for heat rejection Random placement of perf tiles and no blanking panels Uncoordinated CRACs No cooling economizer No dropped ceiling hot air return plenum 18 ” raised floor with 6” cable obstruction Traditional UPS - 89% efficient at full load Standby generator 12 cents/kW-hr No redundancy 90 kW initial IT load (75% load) 59kW of server loads (66%) Total number of servers 425 Consolidation assumptions: Percentage of servers that can be virtualized: 75% Server consolidation ratio: 20:1 53 kW total post virtualization IT load Assumption of improvements Rightsized power and cooling Scalable high efficiency UPS - 96% efficient at full load Added blanking panels Row-based cooling (no containment)
  • Economic and Environmental Drivers for Virtualization

    1. 3. Agenda <ul><li>Capital and Operational Costs </li></ul><ul><li>Cost of System Management </li></ul><ul><li>Positive Business Impacts </li></ul>Tige Phillips Cisco Systems Engineer [email_address]
    2. 4. Capital and Operational <ul><li>Lower upfront capital costs </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce Support and Maintenance </li></ul><ul><li>Control Power and Cooling </li></ul>
    3. 5. System Management <ul><li>Reduced Complexity </li></ul><ul><li>Allow Automation </li></ul><ul><li>Redeploy Staff </li></ul>
    4. 6. Business Impact <ul><li>Enable flexible business </li></ul><ul><li>Increase productivity </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce deployment times </li></ul>
    5. 7. Case Study Virtualization and Consolidation - A Operating Cost Analysis Presented For: Northwest Council for Computer Education
    6. 8. <ul><li>Virtualization always increases efficiency </li></ul>Virtualization myths Myth <ul><li>I don ’t need to worry about power and cooling when virtualizing </li></ul><ul><li>High density and high efficiency cannot coexist </li></ul>Myth Myth <ul><li>Virtualization requires high density data centers </li></ul>Myth Ambiguous terminology!
    7. 9. <ul><li>Assess the impact of consolidation / virtualization strategy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effect of under-loaded CRACs, chillers, generators </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential hotspots </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Identify issues in system design or operation that compromise efficiency and recommend solutions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Row-based cooling </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scalable UPS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Predictive management tools </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Estimate potential efficiency gains to enable return-on-investment (ROI) calculations for capital expenditures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Data Center Electrical Efficiency Assessment service </li></ul></ul>Three ways we can help with virtualization projects
    8. 10. Go Go to latest online version of this tool Click to resume presentation Done Core | Virtualization-Consolidation | Rev 0
    9. 11. Which density strategy? <ul><li>New or existing data center? </li></ul><ul><li>How many high-density servers? </li></ul><ul><li>How much bulk power and cooling? </li></ul><ul><li>Can IT devices be moved around? </li></ul>Spread the load Consolidate the load Spectrum of post-virtualization densities High-density racks with virtualized servers Low-density racks with no virtualized servers Low-density racks with a mix of virtualized and non-virtualized servers 46 White paper
    10. 12. Case study – The Infrastructure Related Impacts of Virtualization Before Virtualization Annual electric bill Including Cooling A well known financial institution operating a medium sized data center in Utah: <ul><li>120kW Data Center Capacity </li></ul><ul><li>90kW Connected IT Load </li></ul><ul><li>59kW Connected Server Load </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 160 Servers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 35 Racks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Center Efficiency – 49% </li></ul>Before Virtualization $ 193,123
    11. 13. Case study – The Infrastructure Related Impacts of Virtualization $ 140,305 27% savings After Virtualization Annual electric bill Including Cooling <ul><li>120kW Data Center Capacity </li></ul><ul><li>90kW Connected IT Load </li></ul><ul><li>59kW Connected Server Load </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 160 Servers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 35 Racks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Center Efficiency – 49% </li></ul>Before Virtualization <ul><li>53kW Connected IT Load </li></ul><ul><li>22kW Connected Server Load </li></ul><ul><ul><li>75% of Servers Virtualized </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consolidation Ratio: 20 to 1 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 6 Racks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Center Efficiency – 39% </li></ul>After Virtualization Annual Savings $ 52,815 $ 193,123
    12. 14. Case study – The Infrastructure Related Impacts of Virtualization <ul><li>120 kW data center capacity </li></ul><ul><li>90 kW IT load (75% loaded) </li></ul><ul><li>59 kW total server load (66%) </li></ul><ul><li>DCiE = 49% </li></ul><ul><li>Average 7 kW / rack </li></ul><ul><li>DX air conditioning </li></ul><ul><li>No redundancy </li></ul><ul><li>$0.12 / kW hr </li></ul><ul><li>Right-sized power & cooling </li></ul><ul><li>Close-coupled cooling </li></ul><ul><li>Use blanking panels </li></ul><ul><li>High-efficiency UPS (96%) </li></ul>$ 140,305 27% savings 36% savings Before Virtualization After Virtualization $89,251 54% After physical infrastructure improvements savings Before virtualization <ul><li>60 kW capacity </li></ul><ul><li>Data center load 88% </li></ul><ul><li>DCiE = 62% </li></ul>Optimized power & cooling Annual Savings $ 103,872 Annual electric bill Including Cooling $ 193,123 <ul><li>53 kW IT load (42% loaded) </li></ul><ul><li>22 kW total server load </li></ul><ul><li>75% servers virtualizable </li></ul><ul><li>Server consolidation ratio 20:1 </li></ul><ul><li>DCiE = 39% </li></ul>After virtualization

    ×