Archive for February, 2010
Virtualized in Vancouver
By Russell Rothstein
February 22, 2010
We’re fascinated by what’s going on in Vancouver this month. Sure, there’s a lot of drama, action and suspense going on over at the Winter Olympics (such as the valiant efforts of the Jamaican Freestyle Skier to be the first to restore the pride of winter sports to his homeland since the 1988 Jamaican Bobsled team) but we’re even more intrigued by the less mesomorphic young singles cross-town in Vancouver engaging their social skills in a flittering party – flirting virtually with one another through the twitter platform.
For those of you not previously familiar with flittering, it means sending a flirtatious tweet to someone that interests you in the room. And while having the option of flirting online is generally a good thing as it provides a new way for people to find their match, it presents a management challenge – keeping up with the fast pace of the tweets and achieving the visibility to link the virtual (witty tweets) with the physical (cute guy or gal – hopefully).
We find these issues remarkably similar to the management challenges companies face when deploying virtualization. While virtualization presents huge benefits in efficiency gains, it also creates three application management challenges:
- Lost Visibility: Applications become more difficult to manage because virtualization masks the underlying infrastructure layers. It becomes difficult to isolate the problematic tier when a problem occurs, or even understand that a problem is starting to occur before users are impacted. Likewise, it is difficult to determine the impact of VM changes on performance.
- Dynamic Environment: If becomes difficult to keep up with speed of changes in virtual infrastructure. As the folks at EMC call it – “VMotion Sickness”. Then when application performance begins to degrade, people tend to first blame the VM administrator, even if the problem lies elsewhere.
- Overprovisioning: Due to lack of visibility, enterprises often overprovision infrastructure in order to assure performance. Overprovisioning physical hosts (e.g. extra CPU) reduces the cost savings of virtualization.
Virtualization-aware Business Transaction Management addresses these challenges. With OpTier BTM you can regain the visibility lost from virtualization, keep up with changing VMs, and rightsize to maximize cost efficiencies. And while that last sentence would fit into a 140-character tweet, we’re not sure it would get us any dates at the next flittering party.
February 22, 2010 at 2:14 pm Russell Rothstein Leave a comment
Business-IT Alignment: When the Saints Come Marching In?
By Russell Rothstein
February 8, 2010
We are delighted for the residents of greater New Orleans who deserve a celebration after their Saints beat the Indianapolis Colts last night in Super Bowl XLIV. The people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast region, still recovering from Katrina, have been waiting to take home a Vince Lombardi trophy for the first time since the Saints began to play in 1967.
And while it took the Saints forty-three years to achieve their goals of success, back here in the IT industry it has taken about that long to achieve our version of a Super Bowl win – true business-IT alignment.
There is a lot of talk in the industry about the importance of “aligning IT to business”, “managing IT based on business priorities”, and “monitoring IT infrastructure performance from a business perspective”. The concept of aligning IT with the goals of the business is not new – we’ve been talking about it ever since the first time a computer was used for a business application (by a food manufacturer in the UK!) back in 1950.
Yet, the vendor community has not been able to enable CIOs to meet their goals of B/I alignment. A key factor is that application teams, the folks in IT that liaise with the business and are in the best position to align with their LOB counterparts, are still using infrastructure-based tools to monitor and manage their environment. However, transactions are where IT and the business meet, and only with a transaction-based management approach can IT start to manage services from the business perspective. Business transaction management enables application teams to manage their environment, for the first time, from the perspective of business transactions, rather than from infrastructure metrics. (Many of you will recognize these as the still-unrealized goals of BSM – business service management; see a recent Forrester report on how BTM delivers on the promise of BSM.)
BTM answers the following questions to support B/I alignment:
- Resources: How will moving to the cloud help reduce customer churn or improve employee productivity? What is the business impact of a consolidation project? How will adding new servers or VMs change service levels?
- Process: What is the IT cost per business transaction? Is investment in new infrastructure going towards the most business-critical services? Is business impact factored into decisions for change management and release management?
- Language: Does the LOB care about the performance of silo metrics (e.g. JVM, database) or do they care about the performance of a business transaction — for example, what is the time for a submit order transaction, how long the transaction took to verify the credit card, authorize the user, check inventory, etc., and what will the performance look like when transactions increase by 100%?
Without BTM, you lack the transaction-centric information to answer these questions and are left about as helpless as defending against a Peyton Manning pass. And while the Saints achieved success with 340-pound linemen on their side, all you need is to make the move to BTM.
OpTier
Assaf Amit
Andy Wetzel
Russell Rothstein
Motti Tal
Linh C. Ho
Diego Lomanto
