Free Software Linux

“VMware is expensive, but it can save a lot too.” I hear people say that, but I have to wonder if you could be saving more though… Let’s dive in a little deeper to see if indeed there’s more money to be saved by using a virtualization alternative - namely Xen on SLES. 

Let me begin by saying:  I’m not a VMware pricing expert — so if any of you who read this can correct me, please do. However, today I happened across an article at Forbes.com which caught my attention and described the wonderful benefits of virtualization. The article was really mostly about VMware which is the most common virtualization technology in use today, but towards the end of the article they started talking about how pricey VMware is.

While virtualization has become a must-have technology for companies, it’s not cheap. VMware, which serves about 85% of the large enterprise market, sells virtualization software packages that range from $995 to $5,750 for every two processors in a server. So if a company has 100 servers that run on four processors, for instance, the total cost to virtualize the servers can be upward of $199,000. Still, companies say it’s money well spent.

Now I’m sure that these customers are saving money, but do you suppose they realize how much MORE money they could have saved by using something like Xen on SUSE Linux Enterprise Server? I was curious about how VMware really prices their product and so from doing a little research on VMware’s website (here and here and here) I found that:

1. There are different “levels” of VMware (see also). While there are definitely some big product feature differences, VMware Infrastructure Enterprise which includes VMotion  seems to be the most comparable with the features included in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (includes Xen, High Availability Storage Infrastructure, and Live Migration support).
2. Technical support, updates, and access to the latest version comes as part of “Service and Support” (SnS), and is a required purchase (see also). Platinum SnS provides 24×7 and is closest to the Priority support offering for SUSE Linux Enterprise.
3. An additional product, VMware VirtualCenter Server is also required; although only 1 copy (plus SnS) is needed per data center.

As an exercise, I thought it might be a good exercise to do some back-of-the-envelope cost estimates to see how the various solutions compare.  I used list pricing to be consistent, so volume discounts are not applied here, and I took a swag at the Windows OS and the server hardware costs (both of which I was very conservative on). I also assume that the customer wants 24×7 support for this illustration.  Let’s compare using the solution example from the article:

• 100 physical servers with 4 processors each (let’s assume quad-core beauties).
• I’m not sure how many virtual machines will run on that hardware effectively, but let’s use 10 as a nice, round number. That means we have 100 physical servers, with 1000 virtual machines.
• I assumed all the virtual machines were a Windows OS.

The physical server solution (baseline cost):

• 1000 servers require 1000 physical servers
• 1000 servers  x  $10,000 per server for hardware = $10M in hardware
• 1000 servers  x  $1000 per server for OS costs (Windows?) = $1M in OS costs
• No virtualization means $0 in virtualization costs
• TOTAL  =  $11M

The VMware solution:

• 1000 virtual servers require 100 physical servers (10:1 ratio est.)
• 100 servers  x  $10,000 per server for hardware = $1M in hardware
• 1000 virtual servers  x  $1000 per server for OS costs (Windows?) = $1M in OS costs
• 100 servers  x  4 processors per server = 400 processors = 200 processor pairs
• 200 processor pairs  x  $5750 per pair for VMware Infrastructure Enterprise = $1.15M in VMware costs
• 200 VI licenses  x  $1438 Service and Support (SnS) Platinum (24×7) = $288K in VMware support costs
• 1 VMware Virtual Center Server  x  $4995 = $5K in Virtual Center costs
• 1 Virtual Center Server  x  $1249 SnS Platinum (24×7) = $1K in Virtual Center support costs
• TOTAL  =  $3.44M
• Savings of $7.56M over physical or 69%  (a very good cost savings, for sure)

Clearly there are some significant cost savings to be had by using VMware (or any virtualization for that matter).  But instead of just saying, “Yes there’s a benefit to virtualization” I at least now have something to point to.  Now let’s take a look at using SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) which includes Xen virtualization. For this model, I also added in the cost of the SUSE Linux Enterprise Virtual Machine Driver Pack (SLE VMDP) which brings the performance of Windows 2003 on Xen/SLES to “near native performance.”  (Sidebar: I’ve seen data that suggests it’s much closer to native performance than VMware too; but that’s a different blog entry).

The Xen on SLES solution:

• 1000 virtual servers require 100 physical servers (10:1 ratio est.)
• 100 servers  x  $10,000 per server for hardware = $1M in hardware
• 1000 virtual servers  x  $1000 per server for OS costs (Windows?) = $1M in OS costs
• 100 servers  x  $1499 for SLES with Priority (24×7) support = $150K
• 100 servers  x  $699 for SLE VMDP (improves Windows performance) = $70K
• Xen is included with SLES, which means $0 extra in virtualization costs
• TOTAL  =  $2.22M
• Savings of $8.78M over physical or 79.8%  (an even better cost savings)

So this is a solution is actually a better cost savings than VMware (at least in our simple model here). BUT, let’s consider one additional possibility. What if we are able to convert those Windows workloads over to SUSE Linux Enterprise Server?  For example: web servers, databases, application servers, SAP, Oracle, file/print, etc.  What would be the impact then?  For one thing, you’d be taking advantage of the unlimited virtual machine policy that Novell has (as long as you’ve got one SLES subscription per physical server, any additional virtual machines of SLES can be used at no additional charge.  This actually applies to not only Xen on SLES, but any virtualization — even VMware.  Let’s take a look…

The VMware solution + converting Windows OS to SLES:

• Same as before, but remove the Windows OS and replace it with:
• 100 servers  x  $1499 for SLES with Priority (24×7) support = $150K
• 1000 SLES virtual servers  x  $0 per server for OS costs = $0 in extra OS costs
• TOTAL  =  $2.59M
• Savings of $8.41M over physical or 76%  (a very good cost savings, for sure)

The Xen on SLES solution + converting Windows OS to SLES:

• 1000 virtual servers require 100 physical servers (10:1 ratio est.)
• 100 servers  x  $10,000 per server for hardware = $1M in hardware
• 1000 SLES virtual servers  x  $0 per server for OS costs = $0 in extra OS costs
• 100 servers  x  $1499 for SLES with Priority (24×7) support = $150K
• The SLE VMDP was not required because the paravirtual drivers for SLES are already built in and included.
• Xen is included with SLES, which means $0 extra in virtualization costs
• TOTAL  =  $1.15M
• Savings of $9.85M over physical or 89.5%  (an incredible cost savings)

So you’re looking at $9.85M - $7.56M = $2.29M in potential savings overall. It seems to me that it might actually be worth considering a platform move from Windows to SUSE Linux Enterprise Server if possible.

Some people object saying that they don’t want to have their IT staff learn a new OS.  To them I say… $2.29M buys a LOT of Linux training and you could actually hire a Linux expert or ten.  I’ve had some customers and partners actually tell me that - yes, VMware solution costs more, but it saves a lot too.  That logic makes no sense to me.  Call me old-fashioned, but if you’re looking to cut costs, why cut just some of the cost when you could be cutting MORE of the cost?  An additional $2.29M (20%) savings on a given project is nothing to sneeze at!

You could re-allocate that money so many other ways.  That extra cash could be used for:

• hardware/software
• servers/storage
• professional services/implementation services
• training (on Linux or other technologies)
• new hires
• other IT projects
• or maybe that raise you’ve been wanting. 

Please note that this back-of-the-envelope calculation does not include additional cost factors such as cooling, power, and data center floor space costs/savings or any Microsoft OS software assurance or technical support.  Those would only amplify the ROI and cost savings even more!!

You have already tagged this post. Your tags: