Over the past few years, I have been concerned about data center migration, and these observations have laid a foundation for my thoughts about the challenges of data center migration today. Now, we have the necessity of future data center migration detailed planning, rather than to avoid the power off sexual assault in the middle of the night for migration, or worse, in the last moment of migration was completely restored. But if you make a good plan, regardless of whether you actually is to avoid or solve these problems, in the course of implementation, relevant experience will play a positive role, but does not need to debug, consider. My executive and sponsorship team is always keen to emphasize, "if this happens, we have the relevant steps and plan to take the appropriate means to solve the problem."."
The contingency plans for emergencies and the data center migration are as follows: some suggestions that can help you make some detailed planning ahead of time:
The adoption of new technologies often means other upgrades
If the migration activities involved in the process to migrate to the new hardware, it is usually to update to a newer and better hardware equipment (may bring cost-effective), whether it is specific to the server, storage device, or network equipment. It is a good thing to actively handle scrap equipment and potentially obsolete equipment.
But at the same time, the new hardware is bound to need to support some other aspects of compatibility, upgrades and support. The most obvious is the server's operating system, which usually requires large or small patches, or even firmware updates. But, in fact, this is only the tip of the iceberg. You also need to examine its potential impact on almost all application stacks. These include the database version, the middleware version, and the application itself. These types of upgrades may bring a great deal of burden to your application management team, both from authentication and testing, and may even have a significant impact on your time and project plan.
And then there's nobody looking forward to the future. I remembered those painful experiences in the absence of sufficient migration, pressure test cases, we found that, after migration, for a particular application and hardware combination, a new multi thread processor chip is actually greatly reduced performance of single threaded applications. It's weird. So, we are now asking whether single line or multi threading is necessary to perform appropriate and detailed performance tests before planning.
Do you want to physically move lift-and-shift as the preferred method of migration?
Many of my clients tend to prefer large-scale physical migration as the preferred method. Of course, logically, you don't need to redeploy cables, plugs, racks, and so on, but is that really possible? EH?...... I'm afraid not. For some projects, there are a range of major risks that you need to consider carefully:
Does the supplier need to re test the equipment, especially for larger equipment, such as tape libraries or storage arrays?
Does this involve the choice of shipping companies?
What are you going to do with the data if these data are located in the storage area network (SAN)?
Are you planning to move the entire storage area network (SAN)?
How about the NAS connection?
When will physical transportation be conducted?
Does the server support the security of the internal special data?
If the server is lost or delayed during migration, is there an emergency plan? This plan is definitely not cheap...... You need to insure it.
What changes will occur when the device is reinstalled? Including server name, IP address, firewall rules, backup infrastructure, network routing, DNS, load balancing and so on.
Therefore, based on the above series of reasons, the lift-and-shift migration method is usually the last choice in my best migration selection. Although it may be very effective for special situations such as stand-alone, non production laboratories and test equipment, I do have a lot of bad experience with this approach.
留言列表