O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

5 APM and Capacity Planning Imperatives for a Virtualized World

2.081 visualizações

Publicada em

The proliferation of virtualized applications has greatly increased the complexity of capacity planning and performance management. Monitoring and forecasting CPU utilization is no longer enough. IT operations and capacity planners now must understand and optimize their applications and infrastructure from the end user to the data center.

Join Correlsense and Metron-Athene for an online seminar which will explore key performance management and capacity planning strategies for a virtualized world. We will discuss:

What you need to know about capacity management when operating in both physical and virtual environments
How performance monitoring in virtual environments relates to your capacity management goals
What is unique about capacity and performance management for virtualized applications

Publicada em: Tecnologia
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

5 APM and Capacity Planning Imperatives for a Virtualized World

  1. 1. Five APM and Capacity PlanningImperatives for a Virtualized WorldYour hosts:Rich Fronheiser Frank DaysMetron-Athene CorrelsenseOctober 17, 2012
  2. 2. Agenda1. Challenges of Virtualiztion2. The Five Imperatives3. Summary/Q&A
  3. 3. Housekeeping• Presentation will last 30 minutes• Submit questions via the chat window• Slides will be made available tomorrow
  4. 4. CHALLENGES OF VIRTUALIZATION
  5. 5. Managing Entire EnvironmentPlanning ahead to meet biz requirements and SLAs while managing: Business Constant Change, M&A Service Complex, Multi-Tiered Architectures, SOA Component Heterogeneous, Dynamic (Virtual, Cloud)
  6. 6. Moving from Physical to Virtual• Virtual infrastructure is shared• Can be over-subscribed• Control in the hands of resources manager• App performance before and after migration is critical
  7. 7. Maintaining SLAs• SLAs are still in place even if you virtualize• Load testing might not provide enough info• How do you monitor desktop response time?• How do you know your end to end performance?
  8. 8. Traditional Tools are Insufficient Lack end-to-end performance management and capacity planning functions “CPU and “PING works, “SAN has low “Plenty of Storage & Memory are OK” Temp is OK” utilization” No hardware failures” Application Database X Server Server Fabric Storage Target Application Server SAN Performance SW Mgmt. SW Mgmt. SW Array Mgmt. SW SRM Tools “Plenty of capacity”
  9. 9. THE FIVE IMPERATIVES
  10. 10. Imperative 1:Changing of Mindsets• Shift to virtualization requires a change of mindset in many data centers – Technology moves work to pockets of adequate capacity – Proper amounts of capacity on a host level is no longer focus – Ensure adequate headroom for periods of peak demand – Virtualization provides savings only if capacity managed
  11. 11. Imperative 2:ITIL – Service-Driven Approach• Driven by: – Shared infrastructure/resources – Centralized storage – Reliance on network resources• Strong processes to drive today’s virtualized data center – Incident Management – Problem Management – Service Level Management• Proper CM ensures fewer problems and that SLAs are met
  12. 12. Imperative 3:Focus on Services and SLAs• ITIL-based approach• The service lifecycle is the central focus• Crucial that SLAs are developed that are – Specific – Measurable – Achievable – At an acceptable cost• Ensure enough (but not too much) capacity to meet SLAs
  13. 13. Focus on Services and SLAs• Measuring end-to-end transaction time for production transactions is necessary to see if SLAs are met• When SLAs are not met, model scenarios to determine infrastructure changes• APM data helps find opportunities to right-size virtualized infrastructures
  14. 14. APM/Capacity Data Integration Online Trading Response Time - 21/07/2010 SLA Warn ing SLA Breach Average Response seconds4.03.53.02.52.01.51.00.50.0 21/07/2 010
  15. 15. APM/Capacity Data Integration Online Trading Total Transactions by Type - 21/07/2010 Customer Attri butes Equi ty Orders Order Routi ng OT Risk Anal ysis 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 21/07/2 010
  16. 16. APM/Capacity Data Integration Online Trading Response Time Correlation CPU Uti li zati on Tota l Reported %, mercury Average Response seconds, resp ti me,Onl in eTra ding100 4.0 90 3.5 80 3.0 70 2.5 60 50 2.0 40 1.5 30 1.0 20 0.5 10 0 0.0 21/07/2 010
  17. 17. APM/Capacity Data Integration Server Utilization by Application on the 18/07/2010 for mercury eBan ki ng,Customer Verifi ca ti o,mercu ry On li ne T radi ng,OT Ri sk Anal ysi s,mercury 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 21/07/2 010
  18. 18. Imperative 4:Understand your Complete IT Picture• Monitor critical application performance across physical and virtual environments• Understand your true end-user experience• Verify performance in the new virtual environment
  19. 19. Keep an Eye on your Top Ten Killers
  20. 20. Imperative 5: Monitor your IT Infrastructure End to EndWho what response timesYour users are experiencing SERVER WEB APP SVR PROXY MQ/ESB LDAP CORBA DCOM Web Services Datacenter
  21. 21. Regardless of Location
  22. 22. And Across your Infrastructure
  23. 23. Summary• Virtualization brings many challenges – P2V migrations – Applications environments – Traditional tools are insufficient• Solutions – SharePath to fully track transactions – Athene to optimize capacity management – Using performance data for better capacity management decisions and predictions
  24. 24. QuestionsMore information:info@correlsense.comwww.metron-athene.comwww.correlsense.comwww.real-user-monitoring.com

×