Analysis of virtualized cloud server together with shared storage and estimation of consolidation ratio and TCO/ROI. Issue 8 (28th October 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Meen, Teen-Hang; D. Prior, Steven; Donald Kin-Tak Lam, Artde; Rong Chang, Bao; Tsai, Hsiu-Fen; Chen, Chi-Ming; Huang, Chien-Feng
• Is Part Of: Engineering computations. Volume 31:Issue 8(2014)
• Page Start: 1746
• Page End: 1760
• Publication Date: 2014-10-28
• Subjects: Computer-aided engineering -- Periodicals; Computer graphics -- Periodicals; 620.00285
• DOI: 10.1108/EC-11-2012-0295
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0264-4401

Abstract

<abstract> <title> <x content-type="archive" xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Purpose</title> <p> – The physical server transition to virtualized infrastructure server have encountered crucial problems such as server consolidation, virtual machine (VM) performance, workload density, total cost of ownership (TCO), and return on investments (ROIs). In order to solve the problems mentioned above, the purpose of this paper is to perform the analysis of virtualized cloud server together with shared storage as well as the estimation of consolidation ratio and TCO/ROI in server virtualization. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Design/methodology/approach</title> <p> – This paper introduces five distinct virtualized cloud computing servers (VCCSs), and provides the appropriate assessment to five well-known hypervisors built in VCCSs. The methodology the authors proposed in this paper will gives people an insight into the problem of physical server transition to virtualized infrastructure server. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Findings</title> <p> – As a matter of fact, VM performance seems almost to achieve the same level, but the estimation of VM density and TCO/ROI are totally different among hypervisors. As a result, the authors have the recommendation to choose the hypervisor ESX server if you need a scheme with higher ROI and lower TCO. Alternatively, Proxmox VE would be the second choice if you like to save the initial investment at first and own a pretty well management interface at console. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Research limitations/implications</title> <p> – In the performance analysis, instead of ESX 5.0, the authors adopted ESXi 5.0 that is free software, its function is limited, and does not have the full functionality of ESX server, such as: distributed resource scheduling, high availability, consolidated backup, fault tolerance, and disaster recovery. Moreover, this paper do not discuss the security problem on VCCS which is related to access control and cryptograph in VMs to be explored in the further work. </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Practical implications</title> <p> – In the process of virtualizing the network, ESX/ESXi has restrictions on the brand of the physical network card, only certain network cards can be detected by the VM. For instance: Intel and Broadcom network cards. The newer versions of ESXi 5.0.0 and above now support parts of Realtek series (Realtek 8186, Realtek 8169, and Realtek 8111E). </p> </sec> <sec> <title content-type="abstract-heading">Originality/value</title> <p> – How to precisely assess the hypervisor for server/desktop virtualization is also of hard question needed to deal with it crisply before deploying new IT with VCCS on site. The authors have utilized the VMware calculator and developed an approach to server/desktop consolidation, virtualization performance, VM density, TCO, and ROIs. As a result, in this paper the authors conducted a comprehensive approach to analyze five well-known hypervisors and will give the recommendation for IT manager to choose a right solution for server virtualization.</p> </sec> </abstract>