Virtually every company we talk to needs both disaster recovery solutions to recover their systems and data after a major disruption, and high availability to keep key applications always available. In my discussions with companies considering our everRun software, I’ve heard a lot of them say that they are confused by many vendors’ claims and counter-claims for DR and HA. One of the biggest sources of confusion is that some vendors with solid products for disaster recovery are trying to pass off their DR solutions as reliable HA solutions. If the feedback I’m getting is any indication, these DR solutions posing as HA solutions just don’t work.

It’s not hard to see why a DR solution doesn’t make a good HA solution. With a product that is good at DR, in most cases getting the data across to the other location is pretty straightforward. But when you try to use the same solution to get both the application and the data across to use it for HA, well that’s where it breaks down. Let’s look at why.

A good DR product is usually fairly easy to set up for data replication to another site. But setting up the same product to restart the whole thing, application and data, when a failover occurs is complex and prone to errors. To set it up, you have to script all the pieces to make it happen – fault detection, client redirection to the DR site, application reset, and the list goes on. No wonder we so often hear that scripted-DR-for-HA doesn’t work consistently – there are too many moving parts that have to managed and monitored. In addition, no matter how minor a failure is, failover to the remote site is required. Not every failure you face is a disaster; therefore each failure should not be treated as one. Based on these horror stories, we thought it was a good idea to put together this webinar, Breaking Through the Confusion about DR and HA. I hope to help you better understand when, how, and why DR is the best fit to meet your requirements, when to use an HA solution and how to combine the two for optimal protection.

Interested? You can register here.

As many of you may know, we will be attending virtualization.info’s Virtualization Congress 2008 in London, October 14-16. We highly recommend European IT executives attend the event to gain from vendors and peers lessons learned on planning, implementing, maintaining and maximizing virtualization investments.

Marathon CTO Jerry Melnick will be on hand at the event as a keynote speaker and will be discussing why the XenServer and everRun combination is so resilient. This won’t be the typical “marketing fluff” event you’re probably use to; instead presenters will be sharing real life case studies to illustrate how their products and services have helped deliver on the promises they’ve made to their customers. Additional keynote speakers of note include: virtualization.info founder, Alessandro Perilli, and Citrix CTO, Simon Crosby.

As a Gold Sponsor for the event, we have been given the privilege of providing our customers and business partners attending the event with a 25% discount for registration. To receive the discount simply visit the event registration page and enter the discount code: PartnersAtVC2008.

For those that have already signed up, Alessandro has made the event agenda available here. If you have any additional questions regarding our involvement in the Virtualization Congress or surrounding the event itself, don’t hesitate to contact us directly or leave a comment here on the blog. Hope to see you there!

Every year Windows IT Pro magazine talks with hundreds of vendors, attends dozens of product demos and reviews some of the best products out in the Windows market. All the products the Windows IT Pro staff has identified can help IT professionals do their jobs faster and more efficiently. This year we are pleased to announce that everRun VM has been chosen as a bronze winner in the virtualization category. Here’s what our CEO Gary Philips had to say:

“Given all of the innovative virtualization companies considered for this award, we are honored to be named a Windows IT Pro Editors’ Best Award winner in the virtualization category. This award is the tenth industry award we have received in the past year, a testament to the importance and value of what we are doing to help companies reduce costs and ensure the availability of their applications.”

Other winners in our category include Parallels Virtuozzo Containers (gold winner) and VMware ThinApp (silver winner).

A few week’s ago I wrote about virtualization in large enterprises – chronicling conversations I’ve had with Fortune 100 CEOs and CIOs. Following Jerry’s Mid-Market podcast, I thought I would chime in with my thoughts on virtualization in the Mid-Market; especially since the introduction of products like Hyper-V will increase mainstream adoption at the Mid-Market level significantly.

Mid-Market companies have completely different drivers for adopting virtualization than the larger companies. The key question for Mid-Market level CIOs is “can I consolidate everything?” Most large companies have the ability to segment out the applications they want to virtualize and allocate the appropriate staff to pull it off in a phased approach. Mid-Market companies lack that luxury. They are often times short staffed and have little resources to conduct this sort of deployment. And in many cases, if they can’t consolidate all of the apps, the return doesn’t pencil out.

Why haven’t more Mid-Market companies deployed server virtualization?

One of the first and foremost concerns on the mind of Mid-Market CIO’s I’ve talked to is that they want to be sure that they are going to be able to get and provide the same service as before. Keeping business critical applications like Exchange and SQL up and running, not only effects employees, but also customers and partners as well.

Another major concern which has prohibited Mid-Market companies from deploying is the idea that there are specialized skills required to maintain a virtual environment. This should not be a concern. While some virtualization platforms do require specialized IT skills, new platforms such as Citrix XenServer and Microsoft Hyper-V can realistically be deployed without an army of IT folks or a lot of specialized virtualization skills.

If you’re a Mid-Market company facing a virtualization hurdle, leave me a comment here. We would gladly dive-in to see if we can help you get over it.

With Microsoft’s Hyper-V announcement a few weeks back, the buzz around virtualization continues to rise. In this Network World podcast, our CTO Jerry Melnick discusses what Microsoft’s announcement means for the virtualization industry. Jerry believes that Microsoft’s moves will bring virtualization within reach of many companies who have been hesitant about adopting it before now – giving Microsoft the opportunity to swim in uncharted waters where VMware hasn’t been able to go.

The podcast also highlights Jerry’s take on the thriving virtualization industry and how the growing virtualization ecosystem is creating solutions that “fill in the blanks” e.g. everRun VM allows customers of all sizes to “consolidate with confidence” with reliable availability for virtual servers.

Do you think availability is a critical factor for a successful virtualization deployment?

Can virtualization move beyond test and developmental in most companies and become a key component of the core enterprise IT infrastructure? Jerry Melnick discusses the necessity of high availability in a virtual environment and how it can be achieved with Mike Vizard of eWeek.

If you’re interested in using virtualization for essential applications like Exchange but haven’t yet because you’re worried about keeping them available, we encourage you to listen to this podcast and learn about the proliferation of different virtual machines, why there are different types available, and how Marathon’s HA solution can make virtualization of applications like Exchange and SharePoint a reality.

Virtualization has saturated the market in terms of awareness, but implementation of this highly efficient technology is still reserved for early adopters. After many months of being the media darling, virtualization has only managed to infiltrate about 10% of Fortune 100 businesses. Should we be concerned at the rate businesses are adopting virtualization?

Through recent discussions with Fortune 100 CEOs and CIOs, it is evident that the past 12 months have been the proving grounds for virtualization. Industry leaders that I have talked to from the Financial, Pharmaceutical, Media and Broadcasting space recognize that the value of virtualization goes beyond just cost savings. The real strategic driver of virtualization is the ability to deploy new applications in hours instead of months; which can translate into drastically shrinking the time to market for new products and services.

Over the next 12 months, that 10% will certainly grow as more and more large enterprises see the value on their bottom line, improvement in business processes and the acceleration of new products and services. We’ll see more integration, customization and validation as time goes on. Even though most of the Fortune 100 has already deployed some virtualization, the opportunity for growth is astounding. One Pharmaceutical company I spoke with plans to virtualize 80% of its applications by 2012…starting now.

The rate at which large enterprise businesses are starting to adopt virtualization technology is about to reach the tipping point. We’re excited to be part of the process, by developing solutions that help large enterprises gain the benefits of virtualization across a much broader range of applications.

Following last week’s discussion, event attendees had additional questions that we didn’t get to answer even though we went ten minutes over. We wanted to continue the discussion here on our blog so we figured we would post the continuation of questions and answers for everyone to see. As we mentioned before, if you would like to view the presentation delivered last week by John Humphrey’s (IDC), Simon Crosby (Citrix) and Jerry Melnick (Marathon), download the presentation here.

Are there any performance limitations with everRun VM?

everRun VM supports any guest environment created by XenServer, including multi-CPU VM’s.

Effect of losing inter-server link?

As a best practice we recommend two Availability Links for redundancy. If one should be lost, we will continue to operate unaffected using the remaining one. If both are lost we will take action to prevent complete loss of the VM or SplitBrain.

How far apart can the two machines be – i.e. is there a propagation delay issue?

Host separation is a factor of network latency, which must be <10ms round trip. Current deployments have exceeded 100 miles.

In case of a disk failure, does everRun rebuild the disk from the good physical host to the bad one?

Correct. Recovery of storage is handled as a background task so as not to require downtime or otherwise impact the running VM and application.

When will level 3 of everRun VM be available?

Level-3, System-Level fault tolerance is scheduled for later this year.

What requirements are associated with the everRun Level 3 Protection? (Bandwidth, latency, etc.)

Network and configuration requirements are the same for level-2 and level-3 protection.

Is StorServer a similar or competitive product to everRun?

StorServer is a backup appliance, not a fault-tolerant availability solution, and addresses very different requirements. It would be more complimentary then competitive.

What virtual machines (VMware, Parallel, etc) are supported by Marathon?

Currently only Citrix XenServer, however future plans are to expand upon this.

Are there certain applications that are not suited for everRun, such as I/O or compute intensive apps? Home does DR configurations affect performance?

This is very dependent on the configuration of the server, the VM, the storage and all other components. Appropriate best practices should be followed to ensure optimal performance for all applications.

Can Marathon support physical to vm HA? Does Marathon’s product fully support FC/iSCSI SAN shared storage between protected physical and/or vm pairs? Does Marathon product support local site HA server pair with a third node at a remote site in the event of site failure? Does Marathon product have latency limitations?

Marathon offers solutions for physical and virtual servers. These solutions utilize the same proven fault tolerant technologies however are independent of each other. everRun VM supports any type of storage that is supported by XenServer. Fault tolerance is configured using two VM’s. However we will soon be releasing an asynchronous solution that will allow a third replicated system at a local or remote site. Because everRun VM is a synchronous solution there is a latency requirement of 10ms round-trip between hosts. Our asynchronous solution will not have any latency requirements.

What is the pricing of everRun VM?

everRun VM lists at $4500 when bundled with XenServer Enterprise, and $2000 if you already have XenServer.

Thanks for all of your interest and questions.

There was a great turn out for the joint Citrix and Marathon Webinar today, The “Best of VMWorld Approach” to Virtualization and Availability. Thanks to everyone for attending. If you missed it or want more information visit here to download the presentation.

There were a lot of great questions for Simon Crosby and Jerry Melnick, which we have captured below. If anyone has any additional questions, feel free to leave a comment here on the blog or contact us directly.

Simon: Do you need 64-bit hardware to try out the express edition?

All modern server hardware is 64 bit enabled. Xen uses all of the modern features of Intel VT or ANDV to perform hardware virtualization of Windows; so the answer is yes but if you have a modern server you’re in good shape.

Jerry: How does everRun VM’s second level of availability differ from VMware HA?

One of the key pieces is that we compute through the failures of any I/O fault or failure, and then automatically redirect I/O to the device that survives it. In VMware HA, the failure of an I/O device isn’t necessarily detected or managed it’s just host failure. We are managing virtual machine failures in related I/O devices.

The second piece is that we’re doing active validation of all the devices so that we know at all times if all the resources are available and that they can actually be utilized in the case of recovery. If you don’t have active validation, such as with VMware HA, you can failover your VM and get to the other side but you may find that the device which handles the disk isn’t actually operational because of either a failure in the hardware or some kind of problem administratively with how you configured it.

Simon: Is there an extra cost associated with XenCenter?

No, it’s just a pre-feature of the product. Our architecture does not require something like virtual center because every server in the resource pool redundantly has every piece of information for the entire resource pool. Should any server fail, we automatically elect a pool leader from the remaining servers and all mainstream information is highly available as a result.

XenCenter itself is a perfect thin client UI which interfaces with as many resource pools as you want to run, but it is literally a thin UI – it’s stateless, and all of the state related to managing the infrastructure is in the infrastructure itself, which allows us to really scale this architecture.

Jerry: In the demonstration you gave, are users hitting both hosts in the exchange application being protected?

In the level 3 fault tolerance configuration we are running both hosts redundantly which is what you need to do for full system-level fault tolerance. In level 2 the amount of resource being utilized is less because you’re actually only running a virtual machine on one of the hosts, but you’re running I/O on both of the hosts. In level one you’re running at the next level down, with only a single VM allocated and no preallocation of the secondary side, with all I/O processing on just that one side. There is no active redundancy. That’s why we provide the different levels; so that you can choose which virtual machines really need to use that resource and have that ability, and which ones you want to make some trade-offs of availability versus resource utilization.

Simon: What does it mean to have a 64-bit hypervisor and why is that better?

If you have a 64-bit hypervisor then you can host both 32 and 64-bit guests and you don’t have any issues really to address space conversion problems. It’s a cleaner architecture, the memory architecture scales massively up to four terabytes (not that you can buy a server that has four terabytes of thin slots), but it allows us to massively scale the memory and CPU of the system. We support up to 32 physical CPUs and a box as a result, and we have an architecture that is going to scale superbly for us.

Jerry: Do you need a dedicated LAN to run everRun VM?

The only dedicated LAN we use, and can actually be shared because of the flexibility of XenServer itself, is what we call the availability link which is part of our best practices. Otherwise it’s all a standard LAN configuration that you would have in the XenServer pool.

Jerry: Are there certain applications that are not suited for everRun?

Our technology is completely transparent – relative to the application itself. Any windows application that you run on a Windows VM can be run by our technology.

Jerry: Is it possible to combine XenMotion with everRun VM?

As part of our capability, the ability of motion of VM from one host to the next is extremely integral to it. You get the capabilities to provide recovery from failures as well as to be able to have planned downtime and migrate your VMs when you want to do a repair. It’s an integral part of the product and we use XenMotion as the backbone of it. One difference with everRun VM is that we allow this motion capability without the need for a shared-LUN, or SAN, storage subsystem.

Simon: How would a current ESX 3.x customer migrate to a Xen environment and why should they do that?

There are free tools available to do this which can be downloaded off our forums and indeed Microsoft has similar free tools available. Here’s why you would do it: we guarantee that Citrix XenServer VMs are literally compatible with Microsoft Hyper-V. They’re also compatible with every other Xen implementation. What I see emerging is essentially two camps: A camp in which there is an open architecture (Microsoft storage architecture is very similar to XenServer, it’s also an open architecture) where you’ll have a bunch of virtual infrastructures out there from different vendors all of which are interoperable; and then a camp where there’s VMware.

The reason to move to XenServer is that we are fundamentally focused on a rich ecosystem of value added providers. We are diametrically opposed to an architecture which presumes that everything comes from one vendor, and where the entire architecture is dictated to you. The moment you invest in an architecture which is one size fits all (cost aside) you will find that it has limitations.

I am starting to see that the one size fits all architecture, which has done VMware a great favor for its first 10-15% of the market, is starting to show signs of age as we look at new use cases. For example, for desktop virtualization or for high availability, you can’t do this with that architecture and its no surprise then that at VMWorld the awards for innovation go to open architecture and best of breed vendors – Marathon at VMWorld winning the award for fault tolerance. We are dedicated to an open architecture and best of breed.

Jerry: Is Marathon planning to protect Linux based VMs in the near future?

Our road map will extend over the next year to protect all the hosts that are supported by XenServer.

Simon: Can you give a rough idea of the performance overhead of a virtual server vs. a real server?

It’s highly dependent on the workload. Typically we see between .5% and 2% overhead even for very I/O intensive workloads. For Windows it’s notionally higher. The great thing about this is that we are writing the hardware code; unlike my friends at VMware who are still tied to software implementation of virtualization in which they have to patch the binary of a running guest operating system. We ride the hardware improvement curve of Intel and AMD. What we’ve seen there is roughly a three-fold performance increase per year. Typical overheard for virtualizing Windows guests is around 3-5%. The most intensive workload I have ever seen is in fact Windows Terminal Services or our own Citrix Presentation Server where we currently stand at about 8% overhead.

Jerry: Does everRun VM support shared storage?

Yes. We actually support any capability in storage. Whatever kind of LUN that you can present to XenServer and carve up into a storage repository or a VHD, we will support that. If it’s a local disk, low-end RAID storage or just a bunch of disks we will support that, as well as high-end SAN storage. The advantage of the product is that we will support local storage for very low-end small environments.

Jerry: How far can the servers be separated?

It is not a matter of actual distance but rather a matter of network connectivity between the two hosts. We have systems currently deployed with separation of greater than 100 miles.

Yesterday our partner, Fort Lauderdale based Citrix, announced that they would be expanding its team to the Boston area where they would set up shop for their virtualization business with new offices in Bedford, MA. The virtualization business continues to grow steadily as companies seek ways to minimize power costs and mitigate risk; so being centralized in a tech-savvy labor market is beneficial to Citrix’ success. This expansion is expected to bring 250 workers into the space in the next 12 – 18 months.

We are looking forward to Citrix’ expansion and are eager to continue to work with our partner, who’s now right around the corner. Congrats!