Dell ASM vs. Cisco UCS: How We Tested Infrastructure Automation

In this post, we will look at how to work with the Dell ASM solution to effectively deploy the infrastructure in data centers. This product helps to quickly and easily configure IT systems, so we decided to compare it with its main competitor, Cisco UCS.

The first difference that was found, is the presence of installation wizards in Dell ASM for almost all occasions. They include step-by-step algorithms for setting up infrastructure elements and make it possible to completely forget about the fact that at one time it was necessary to manually write scripts for each information system deployment scenario. For example, Dell ASM already has wizards with which we were able to create a VMware vSphere cluster ready for work. The system itself discovered the equipment, determined the networks and chose the optimal configuration of resources.

Having created a computing environment, we started the launch of services. Dell ASM managed to do it in just 10 steps! It was not possible to do the same trick with Cisco UCS Director, since the process of launching services in this system turned out to be more complex and required the participation of a workflow specialist. Thus, already at the stage of exploring the systems, it became clear that Dell ASM simplifies the implementation of routine tasks and reduces the time costs for administrators to build infrastructure.
')
What is Dell ASM?

Dell ASM and similar tools have become popular because modern companies want to install new equipment and launch ready-made services as quickly as possible. Both the organizations themselves and their clients benefit from this. In addition, it is more profitable for administrators to use their free time to develop the data center, rather than programming and performing routine tasks.

Dell ASM is software for infrastructure automation and workload distribution. The system has a single interface through which you can manage the infrastructure elements and automatically launch new services. Such a unified approach allows to reduce the time spent on working with various consoles when it detects, implements, updates or repairs equipment. And the main difference between Dell ASM is the use of ready-made wizards for each step and each case. Among the advantages of this solution, we have identified:

• Simplified resource discovery and fast download, which allow you to start services in the shortest possible time.
• Providing resources based on templates. It helps to easily allocate the necessary resources for IT services, while respecting the complex infrastructure requirements.
• Support for the service life cycle, which includes scaling and updating the infrastructure, as well as monitoring its compliance with regulatory requirements.

As you probably noticed, the specifications look promising. But let's get to the point.

Testing

With both Dell ASM and Cisco UCS at our disposal, we, rubbing our hands together, began the process of deploying a VMware vSphere cluster — one of today's most popular infrastructure solutions. For Dell ASM, this procedure turned out to be extremely simple and took only 15 minutes and 57 seconds from the moment the equipment was turned on until the readiness to load virtual machines was reported. At Cisco UCS, the result was less impressive, as the cluster deployment took 1 hour 19 minutes and 5 seconds. Thus, the result of Dell ASM was 79.8% better than that of Cisco UCS.

But that's not all. In the case of Cisco UCS, we estimated the time spent running the installation wizard according to the procedures described in the documentation. In reality, the time required to create a wizard for your tasks in the UCS Director will be much longer. The reason is that for this you need to know well the features of creating service profiles and its additions in Cisco UCS. During the procedure, there may be errors, reloads and modifications of the scripts to the needs - this should be laid.

A completely different approach to work is demonstrated by the Dell ASM solution. It allows you to create a ready-to-work cluster, performing 315 fewer manual operations compared to Cisco UCS. This means that the role of the human factor here is reduced by 70.6%.

Differences

For starters, Dell ASM offers automation of all stages of vSphere cluster deployment through a single interface. Through Cisco UCS, we were able to do the same thing, only using both Cisco UCS Manager and UCS Director at the same time.

When we started working with both systems, we noticed a big difference between the procedures for creating templates in Dell ASM and Cisco UCS. Dell ASM contains 15 service templates that help administrators get started and create services. Using the editor, you can create a clear hierarchy of adding physical and virtual components during the implementation of services. In a few clicks we were able to add storage systems, compute nodes, virtual machines, operating systems, and necessary applications, adding to the existing service template.

With the Dell solution, you can install the operating system on bare metal (bare-metal) or create ready-made configurations, for example, with Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (we used it in our experiment). The template is published in just a few clicks, and the status of running services is monitored through the Dell ASM Dashboard.

When we tried to launch the same services in UCS Director, we encountered a lot of difficulties. The fact is that the capabilities of the Cisco solution are based on the creation of workflows through the Workflow designer: you need to work with it and create your wizard from scratch. When we started working with Cisco UCS Director, we found only five templates for workflows. And, for example, to implement a vSphere cluster with iSCSI storage system, you had to delve into the community and develop your own template that would fit the ready-made computing environment. And to modify existing templates, you need to be well versed in their features.

Dell ASM editor simplifies the process of individual configuration of virtual and physical components. Each step was logged, the processes were automated, so we managed to avoid developing procedures for implementing the service. In Cisco UCS Director, on the contrary, I had to understand the details of the process and add the necessary steps to complete it. The Cisco UCS structure numbers each task, and later steps can use the results obtained at previous levels. As practice has shown, this approach leads to difficulties when we add additional components. For example, if the wizard gives an error due to the lack of a specific previous step, it must be added to the workflow, even if it is not needed to solve the task at hand.

Testing the deployment of services in Cisco UCS Director took several days from our administrators. At the same time, Dell ASM templates were initially ready for use, so we were able to skip the creation of our workflow. The best result we have achieved for UCS Director is two days to develop one service. In Dell, ASM was able to start services right away.

Saving

Conducting our assessment, we have not forgotten about the costs of managing IT environments. Such procedures can be quite expensive, and user needs grow much faster than IT department budgets. It would seem that any automation system that can quickly provide services and manage data centers can help in this situation. However, the experiment showed that not everything is so simple.

A simple Dell ASM deployment system allows the system to work with technicians of any level. The Cisco solution, by contrast, requires tremendous experience and familiarity with various infrastructure components. Therefore, Dell ASM allows you to use the benefits of infrastructure automation without additional training or hiring new highly qualified specialists.

Interesting results were shown by the evaluation of licenses for the control systems under study. Dell ASM for automating the work of the data center costs $ 165 per site, while Cisco will cost $ 4000 per site. Thus, the Dell ASM is also 95% more affordable.

Conclusion

According to the results of our testing, we can say: there are better ways to spend your time than to work with an expensive automation solution that requires time-consuming procedures and excessive manual configuration. In this comparison, a user-friendly Dell ASM system with out-of-the-box installation wizards makes it much easier to start IT services.

We found out that Dell ASM takes up almost 80% less time and almost 71% less manual operations to run off-the-shelf services compared to similar processes in Cisco UCS Director and UCS Manager.

But it's not just that Dell ASM makes it faster and easier to run a ready-made VMware vSphere cluster. This system is also much cheaper. Compared to Cisco UCS, the cost of automating a single compute node for Dell ASM is 95% less.

The conclusions are quite simple: the figures at 80% - 71% - 95% speak for themselves.