Comments on: Blades and Virtualization Aren’t Mutually Exclusive: Part Four, HP Traditional Expansion Options http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/ The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:13:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: slowe http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-50025 slowe Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:57:17 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-50025 Korman, in my experience most people use a single dual-ported HBA rather than giving up the NICs, especially when it comes to VMware deployments. As for how flexible Flex10 can be (and I think you really mean VirtualConnect), I don't have any direct experience so I can't comment. Good luck! Korman, in my experience most people use a single dual-ported HBA rather than giving up the NICs, especially when it comes to VMware deployments. As for how flexible Flex10 can be (and I think you really mean VirtualConnect), I don’t have any direct experience so I can’t comment.

Good luck!

]]> By: korman http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-50023 korman Sat, 15 Jan 2011 02:15:33 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-50023 I know this is an old post but I am working on a C7000 deployment and would like to know if people tend to run a single Dual port hbas in half height blades with out worry or 2 Dual port hbas with 4 FC modules in bays 3,4 and 5,6. I am not worried so much about performance but redundancy. I usually run 2 x Single port hbas in my rack mount servers. In 6 years of working with FC I have only ever seen a port / sfp / LED fail never the hba chip to the best of my knowledge. I also feel that with flex10 replacing a failed mezzanine card or the blade should be quick and relativly painless , no zoning, masking, etc, etc. Thoughts? I know this is an old post but I am working on a C7000 deployment and would like to know if people tend to run a single Dual port hbas in half height blades with out worry or 2 Dual port hbas with 4 FC modules in bays 3,4 and 5,6. I am not worried so much about performance but redundancy. I usually run 2 x Single port hbas in my rack mount servers. In 6 years of working with FC I have only ever seen a port / sfp / LED fail never the hba chip to the best of my knowledge. I also feel that with flex10 replacing a failed mezzanine card or the blade should be quick and relativly painless , no zoning, masking, etc, etc.

Thoughts?

]]> By: Aaron Delp http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-47348 Aaron Delp Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:32:33 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-47348 @Ewald - I'm sorry to say but I'm not sure. I don't have experience with the sb600c. I saw specs on it a long time ago (2+ years ago when it was being developed) but I can't remember anymore. Have you tried the Quick Specs for it? Do a Google for HP sb600c Quick Specs and see if that helps. Thanks! @Ewald – I’m sorry to say but I’m not sure. I don’t have experience with the sb600c. I saw specs on it a long time ago (2+ years ago when it was being developed) but I can’t remember anymore. Have you tried the Quick Specs for it? Do a Google for HP sb600c Quick Specs and see if that helps.

Thanks!

]]> By: Ewald http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-47343 Ewald Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:38:30 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-47343 Hi I have a blade c7000 with 2 x bl460c and a sb600c. If i configure an iscsi connection on the bl460, will this traffick go through my switchcard in bay 1 & 2 or does this traffick stay internal in the blade? Hi

I have a blade c7000 with 2 x bl460c and a sb600c.
If i configure an iscsi connection on the bl460, will this traffick go through my switchcard in bay 1 & 2 or does this traffick stay internal in the blade?

]]> By: Andrew Beattie http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-44237 Andrew Beattie Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:03:44 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-44237 Aaron / Scott, I work for a VAR in Australia, and we are starting to see a lot of interest in VDI in the eduation space, for this reason we are building the configs for our Virtualisation with as much I/O as possible, at present the cost between the jump from 6 x 1GB to 1/2 x 10GB for I/O is a little high, but i'm hoping it will drop as more and more 10GB demand is generated. Aaron / Scott,

I work for a VAR in Australia, and we are starting to see a lot of interest in VDI in the eduation space, for this reason we are building the configs for our Virtualisation with as much I/O as possible, at present the cost between the jump from 6 x 1GB to 1/2 x 10GB for I/O is a little high, but i’m hoping it will drop as more and more 10GB demand is generated.

]]> By: adelp http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-43841 adelp Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:53:51 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-43841 Brad - Take a look at the previous article I did on power! :) Brad – Take a look at the previous article I did on power! :)

]]> By: Brad Hedlund http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-43754 Brad Hedlund Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:09:45 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-43754 Wow, that HP chassis sure does look cluttered with management and switching modules. Perhaps that is why 10 fans are needed for adequate system cooling. How much power do the fans require in a fully populated chassis? ;-) Wow, that HP chassis sure does look cluttered with management and switching modules. Perhaps that is why 10 fans are needed for adequate system cooling. How much power do the fans require in a fully populated chassis?
;-)

]]> By: Aaron Delp http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-43740 Aaron Delp Sat, 28 Feb 2009 18:50:21 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-43740 Harry K - There are many other vendors out there (Sun, Fujitsu, Dell, etc) but I don't have experience with them. I work for a reseller and while we are able to sell just about all companies, our customers have asked for HP and IBM so they are my areas of expertise currently. I recognize there are other players in the game, I just can't speak to them with enough confidence to post about them. Harry K – There are many other vendors out there (Sun, Fujitsu, Dell, etc) but I don’t have experience with them. I work for a reseller and while we are able to sell just about all companies, our customers have asked for HP and IBM so they are my areas of expertise currently.

I recognize there are other players in the game, I just can’t speak to them with enough confidence to post about them.

]]> By: Harry K. http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-43737 Harry K. Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:32:56 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-43737 Hi Aaron and Scott, have you or someone else ever considered Sun in this discussion? If you have a look at their Blade Servers you will probably recognize that there is another player in this league who outperforms IBM and HP in several points. The huge amount of virtualization power can be seen with this Blade module for example: The X6440 Blade supports up to 4 AMD Opteron Quad-CPUs and up to 256 GB of memory. Additionally you can have up to 10(!)x GigEthernet Ports per Blade and the 10H Chassis can keep ten Blades. Another great thing about Sun Blade is, that it supports 3 different CPU Architectures in just one Chassis. They are Intel, AMD and SPARC. I don't want go into more detail here, but it would be interesting to know what you and the others think about the Sun way. Cheers. ;-) Hi Aaron and Scott,

have you or someone else ever considered Sun in this discussion?
If you have a look at their Blade Servers you will probably recognize that there is another player in this league who outperforms IBM and HP in several points. The huge amount of virtualization power can be seen with this Blade module for example:
The X6440 Blade supports up to 4 AMD Opteron Quad-CPUs and up to 256 GB of memory. Additionally you can have up to 10(!)x GigEthernet Ports per Blade and the 10H Chassis can keep ten Blades. Another great thing about Sun Blade is, that it supports 3 different CPU Architectures in just one Chassis. They are Intel, AMD and SPARC.

I don’t want go into more detail here, but it would be interesting to know what you and the others think about the Sun way. Cheers. ;-)

]]> By: Richard Boswell http://blog.scottlowe.org/2009/02/16/blades-and-virtualization-arent-mutually-exclusive-part-four-hp-traditional-expansion-options/comment-page-1/#comment-43663 Richard Boswell Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:24:38 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/?p=1188#comment-43663 Scott, I completely agree, it's all about the sizing. Right now I'm in the throws of a 4 datacenter consolidation\move so really I kinda biased towards the 680 for the memory capacity reasons. In our case that gives us a much higher ROI for VMs\blade using our current (and future) plans with Cisco Nexus and FCoE and with the Flex-10 modules we are deploying. Our storage group doesn't support iSCSI so we aren't even architecting anything with that in mind. Excellent points though. Scott,

I completely agree, it’s all about the sizing. Right now I’m in the throws of a 4 datacenter consolidation\move so really I kinda biased towards the 680 for the memory capacity reasons. In our case that gives us a much higher ROI for VMs\blade using our current (and future) plans with Cisco Nexus and FCoE and with the Flex-10 modules we are deploying. Our storage group doesn’t support iSCSI so we aren’t even architecting anything with that in mind. Excellent points though.

]]>