Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Downsizing, Rightsizing, Cloudsizing?
Will today’s datacenter follow yesterday’s mainframe?

This blog was published originally as column at ITSM portal

Many hypes in IT are just the same old idea, launched again, but with better technology and under a new name. Who remembers Larry’s original network computer? And who is just about to buy one, but now based on Android or iOS4? Similarly, we could say for the datacenter: “The Datacenter is dead, long live the Virtual Datacenter”. The danger of this approach is that we treat the Virtual Datacenter just like any new type of infrastructure and simply rehost our existing applications by moving them from physical to virtual machines (P2V). Just as we rehosted our applications from mainframes to minicomputers in the days of downsizing.

But if we only “rehost”, we will miss out big time on the potential benefits of virtualization: just cost and energy reductions, but also business and IT agility, management efficiency, market responsiveness and service improvements. And there are several warning signs that this is exactly what is happening. The first warning sign came from David Linthicum who signaled that “Bowing to IT demands, cloud providers move to reserved instances”. In that article he showed how Amazon “users can make a one-time, up-front payment to reserve a database instance in a specific region for either one or three years.” Upfront payment? Specific location? Three years? Sounds pretty much like buying a server to me. Now David saw it as a necessary evil to get “reluctant enterprises over the cloud fence”, but to me it was a first signal that traditional behavior was making it across to a new type of infrastructure.

This week this was confirmed in “Despite the promise of cloud, are we treating virtual servers like physical ones?” a blog by my colleague Jay Fry. He picked up on that fact that - according to recent market and vendor numbers – virtual servers at leading cloud servers are getting bigger and are used for significantly longer periods. Now “longer” is a relative term, I remember telling my (sales) manager that sales cycles were getting longer, after which he pointed out that if my customers never bought, the sales cycle would become infinitely long. Same here, if a workload is loaded on cloud servers but never removed, you get what our friends at VMware call the “Hotel California Syndrome” ( “You can checkout any time you like, but you can never leave!”). As a result, the use of the cloud becomes similar to leasing hardware. You don’t own it, but you are still solely responsible for the usage. And as Jay points out in his blog, that was never the point of cloud computing, it was all about sharing and elasticity.

More serious is that this type of simply rehosting does not add any value for the users. Users never cared whether something ran in the back on a mainframe or a mini and likewise they won’t care whether it runs on a physical box, a virtual box or even a shoebox. What they care about is ease of use, flexibility, connectability, scalabilty, functionality and cost (and probably in that order). Traditional downsizing was often done purely for cost reasons, and initially the savings were quite considerable. So considerable that many started to declare the mainframe dead, a rumor that turned out to be greatly exaggerated. Pretty soon “the mainframe” reinvented itself and became more efficient, more connectable, more flexible and as a result greatly reduced its cost per transaction (the only cost that counts). Funnily enough we already see the same happening with datacenters: under the name “private cloud” they are rapidly becoming more efficient, flexible, scalable, etc. Let’s face it, a private cloud is basically a datacenter with a fancy name, it is no more elastic or shared than leased servers. You’re still limited by your available resources. (Which,BTW,does not mean it cannot be a lot more agile, scalable and cost effective than a traditional datacenter.)

The big question I have is whether the datacenter will follow the mainframe with regard to new applications. The rejuvenation of the mainframe stopped the further rehosting of applications to mini’s (also because the remaining applications were the biggest and most complex ones left). But nobody implements new applications on their mainframe anymore. New applications by default were installed on (Unix or Windows) mini’s. Mini’s which by the way by that time were as big and as fast (and as expensive) as the modernized mainframes. And software vendors like SAP were even bringing our their new applications (SAP R3) exclusively for the new platform, even if they had been extremely successful on the old platform with R2. I guess you see where I am going. Several software vendors are now building their new applications exclusively for the cloud.

Will the traditional datacenter share the same fate and get more efficient at what it runs today, but not see many new applications enter its doors anymore? Now, it is early days. Cloud is just getting started (think of the era of PDP computers). But pretty soon some vendor or group of vendors will coin the term “Open Cloud” (remember the Open Systems scam) and that will be the end of it. Now, sure, some applications will not be cloud-suitable, just like some applications still run on mainframes, despite their owners attempted to rehost them roughly every other year during the past decade. Many finally gave up, it was too hard and too complex, and outsourced them altogether. Funnily (or sadly) enough we see a similar phenomenon around virtualization; we call it virtual stall. After virtualizing about 35% of the servers, many virtualization initiatives stop. After that, it becomes too hard and too complex. Now there may be some applications not suitable for virtualization, but I am sure it is not 65%, it might be 10% (similar to what we saw in mainframes).

The reason these initiatives stall are varied. An important reason is complexity. A distributed datacenter is light years more complex than any mainframe and adding virtualization adds even more complexity. But that does not mean it cannot be done. Today cars are also lightyears more complex than a Model T Ford, yet today’s mature garages manage to run and maintain them more reliably and more (fuel) efficiently. Maturity being the keyword here, using a virtualization maturity model, IT departments can get the complexity under control and reap the benefits of an almost fully virtualized datacenter. And don’t underestimate the true benefit of that, even if we add all new applications exclusively to the cloud, it will be decades before the majority of modern organizations applications will be running there. We call these applications affectionately our legacy or installed base, it was not build overnight and for sure it won’t disappear overnight either.


Now we mentioned a lot of hardware in this blog, while I normally only talk about software. But while on the topic, it is funny to see how two non-traditional platforms are rapidly making in-roads into the traditional datacenter, potentially replacing the traditional incumbents and getting an unusual enthusiastic reception by their users (see links). One is the Cisco UCS platform, a platform designed from the ground up to run virtual workloads (user review). The other one – surprise, surprise – is the next generation … mainframe (review). It’s designed around the fastest CPU on the market today, it is gunning to become the backbone for loads and loads of distributed servers, currently for Linux and AIX, but soon also for other platforms. So even if today’s datacenter may be past its Prime (pun intended), soon it will be a cool place to live and work (and I don’t mean because of the air-conditioning).

Monday, September 13, 2010

VMworld 2010. Two trends and how they converge.

You may have missed it in the flurry of news from Apple, but VMware recently had their annual get-together at the Moscone Center in San Francisco. On stage VMware shared two key insights: successful virtualization is becoming more about orchestration and automation than about hypervisors.  And, private clouds will rapidly develop into hybrid clouds. I agree on both but believe the combination of these two trends has some distinct consequences that did not get picked up by the media.

Let me start with a disclaimer and some disclosure. I followed the event not on-site but through the California blogosphere reporting on the event, and I work for CA Technologies.

A third trend, by the way, was that more and more vendors (like VMware last week and CA Technologies back in May) resort to using a professional comedian to introduce the concept of cloud computing at their annual customer events.  Somehow IT became so complex we need animations and comedians to explain what we sell. Makes you think - doesn't it? Imagine Steve Jobs having to ask Jerry Seinfield to explain the iPod.

Of course, we at CA Technologies agree with VMware on the importance of management, but given we are a company making  a living out of selling IT management and IT automation solutions on top of many different platforms, you might say it is a pretty safe bet for us to agree. Embracing the hybrid cloud as a strategy is a bit more of a risky bet for vendors. Private cloud is a great name for marketing reasons. Private sounds safe, while public sounds kind of ... well, public or unsecure and scary. And even though many technical people understand that once you can provision automatically into a private cloud you can provision into any cloud, the typical corporate IT buyer and his partner in buying decisions - the CFO - are still quit conservative.

So, embracing hybrid clouds so wholeheartedly is quite a step for a company that just overcame a similar fear of the unknown - a fear that plagued virtualization.  And to celebrate this hybrid cloud idea VMware even decided not build a private cloud on site, like the datacenter under the stairs of the Moscone center they built last year (which was already a step up from the traditional datacenter that historically is located in a basement).

But unfortunately, cloud computing is not just about hybrid cloud, which was roughly defined at VMworld as having VMware installed in your own datacenter and in the datacenter of your cloud providers.  It is about a hybrid world, where providers run many different kinds infrastructure and platforms if it economically makes sense to do so. How hybrid this new world is was actually acknowledged when Maritz talked about SaaS (Software as a Service). He mentioned that VMware is running 15 SaaS applications, none of which he approved, and none of which they have managed to get under single sign-on yet. The question is, of course, how organizations should address these "rogue applications" and how organizations can gain insight into what they use and who they use it from. At CA Technologies, we see this as an important problem. In response, we teamed up with Carnagie Mellon University to start the Service Measurement Index (SMI) and cloudcommons.com.  Cloud Commons is an independent community that allows you to keep track of what is available in the market, and SMI gives you a way to measure and compare IT services you are using internally and from the cloud.

Since Maritz is a former Microsoft executive, the statements most quoted by the media were the ones referencing Microsoft and Windows.  For Maritz it is no longer about the hypervisor, it is about the application platform. And in my personal view, his eyes are set firmly on replacing Windows, not Hyper-V.  Now, ambition is good, but at the same time, one should be careful not to throw away any old shoes before the new ones fit comfortably. Currently many VM implementations stall at about 40% (as my colleague Andi Mann discussed recently on CIO.com), which compared to early Windows deployments may seem great, but is not good enough for today's standards. Plus - in my personal opinion - the last thing the corporate world is waiting for is the next Windows. The experience of living through the last one - all the way from 3.1 to 7.0 - was bad enough.  Cloud computing finally promises a way to consume services without having to worry about maintaining a platform.

That is what cloud management for end-users should focus on (which entails a lot more than a self-service portal where users can pick PC configurations). At the same time, providers will need extremely robust, flexible and easy-to-deploy platforms to render these services, but given how new this industry is and how diverse these services are, these provider platforms will need to be hybrid and diverse.

Tomorrow's cloud will be as hybrid as today's datacenter, so we better get used to it. It's called consumerisation, and with end user departments going out to procure complete cloud services - like SaaS-based CRM - it goes way beyond "bring your iPad to work" days. What we need in IT is a mind shift from thinking we can provide all of the IT our users will ever need, to finding a way to help our users consume all of the IT they could ever want (in a safe, secure and cost-effective way). We call this moving from being the manager of the IT factory to being the orchestrator of the IT supply chain.

This blog is cross-posted at http://ca.com/blogs
Do you tweet? Follow Gregor on Twitter
@gregorpetri .