Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services 2. Two years ago I started writing the Citrix Provisioning Services versus Machine Creation Services decision trees. A year and 1. 2k visitors later it’s time for an updated version. The Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services decision tree has gotten a lot of attention over the last year. It’s used on Citrix blogs and more recently in one of the Citrix webinars by Atlantis Computing. This makes me proud and definitely works as an energizer to continue working on projects like this.
ServiceNow integrates with many third party applications and data sources, as described in Integration overview. The most common integrations. My company is just getting started with SCCM 2012 so no one is really fimilar with it yet, but I wonder if it will accomplish what I need to do. We are phasing out. Managing File-Based Write Filter Images on HP Thin Clients Table of Contents: Introduction. What is Altiris? Altiris Deployment Solution 8 offers enhanced workstation and server deployment capability that dramatically reduces the time and cost of deploying.
I’m writing this in such a way you won’t need to read the earlier articles but of course you are free to do so anyway. The first article by Daniel Feller can be found here. My article called Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services can be found here.
Customers enrolled in a Microsoft Enterprise Agreement are required to submit an annual True-up to account for changes in their software usage. Microsoft SCCM has a great infrastructure to manage desktops and their applications. But, one of the limitations of SCCM is its inability to patch non Microsoft. Nessus Plugins Windows. Adobe Flash Player = 25.0.0.171 Multiple Vulnerabilities (APSB17-17)IBM Spectrum Protect / Tivoli Storage Manager Installed.
The 2. 01. 3 revision of Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services can be found here. After Daniel posted his decision tree over three years ago a lot has changed. New Citrix features like Xen. Server Intellicache, MCS for “Xen. App on Xen. Desktop 7. Bas van Kaam wrote an excellent article on Web. Scale technology.
New features and devices are not the only thing that changed over the last few years. Our knowledge of Windows IOPS usage and how to handle that load has grown as well. Mostly thanks to Jim Moyle and his extensive research into the world of the Windows IO needs. One example is the “MCS uses more than 1. IOPS over PVS” discussion. This was only true in a theoretical world because we are talking about read operations which are mostly cached anyway. All of this combined completely changes the decision making process and with this new revision I’m going to share my take on this.
Will this always be right? Probably not and even if I am , it will change over time. Keep your eyes open and be smart!
Please let me know if you have another use case and help me get it right! Before focusing on the why and how let’s start with looking at the original decision tree by Daniel Feller. Now that we have seen the decision tree it’s interesting reevaluate certain decisions. I will finalize everything in the end conclusion where a new decision tree is included. Please remember Daniel created this years ago and all the changes are because technology changed, he wasn’t wrong at that time and the decision tree has proven to be valuable! The reason I’m comparing the oldest of Decision trees to the newest is to make sure we don’t leave any old best practices floating around.
With great best practices come great responsibility! Never stop thinking! Mix and match. Let’s start with the first decision in the tree in which we ask the question about using a Xen. Desktop only, Xen. App only or mixed platform. The reason for this is that, before Xen. Desktop 7, it wasn’t possible to do MCS for Xen.
App load. Since Xen. Desktop 7 it’s actually possible to use Machine Creation Services for Xen. App. IOPSIn the old days we were worried about boot and logoff storms because of the amount of IOPS this generated on our expensive shared storage systems. If so we would advice to use Provisioning Services because of better IOPS caching possibilities. Lots has changed in the past few years but the IOPS load is pretty much still the same, yet the decision making process changed.
The reason for this change is that we now have more knowledge about the amount of IOPS and vendors jumped in and created new solutions offering huge amounts of IOPS on central or local storage. On the hypervisor level we are now able to do live storage migrations. This helps us when we need to perform management tasks and don’t have the time to wait for all of the users to close their sessions. Thin Provisioning. For Machine Creation Services it’s highly recommended to use a storage solution that offers the ability to utilize thin provisioning. This way we only use as much data as we need for write caching.
If we don’t utilize thin provisioning each target will use as much disk space as the configured base image. Persistency. Another decision is the need for dedicated aka persistent virtual desktops. If we need persistency you were forced to use Machine Creation Services. The reason for this decision was based on the fact that Provisioning Services falls back to Server Side caching when the cache had to be persistent.
This method of caching results in a crappy desktop performance. Since the introduction of Citrix Provisioning Services 6 we are able to offer persistent caching on the local target hard disk, which pretty much solves this issue. We therefore are now able to utilize Provisioning Services and Machine Creation Services for persistent desktops. Physical vs Virtual. When we have a demand for physical virtual desktops we still need Provisioning Services. Machine Creation Services integrates on the hypervisor storage layer and therefore can’t be used on a physical target.
This is the simplest decision of them all! Advanced Image Management.
As a reader of my blog you should already know that I like automation therefore I would never update images but instead rollout a new image. This way I can retest my image deployment every once in a while . Not of lesser importance I can always go back to my deployment run books to see how a certain component was installed for troubleshooting purposes. If you care about image versioning and do a lot of image updates Provisioning Services is your way to go.
Provisioning Services gives you greater flexibility to work with image versions and updates. Not everyone agrees with me on this one so I have decided to keep this out of the decision tree for now. Multiple image locations or multiple images. This section has been added after publishing the article because the decisions attracts some attention, mostly by the guys from Atlantis Computing which must mean this market space has their full attention: ). When we look at the Provisioning Services (PVS) architecture we have a central image store, the PVS server, for the sake of keeping things simple I’m not going into where PVS gets the image from local, filer, DFS et cetera. Machine Creation Services (MCS) works on the storage layer and places the image on each datastore which is used for targets.
When I create a new image or update an image with PVS I just change the pointer for each target and I’m done. With MCS that’s different, MCS first creates a single imagefile from a VM snapshot and when finished copies that image to each datastore. This process takes up CPU, IO and network resources and can take up to an hour in one of my production platforms (SSD 1. Gbit et cetera). So imagine a VDI cluster with 1.
SSD, Fusion. IO or just as easily Atlantis ILIO. This would mean we have, at least, 1. With PVS this all stays simple, PVS is the central image location. With MCS this would mean we copy the base image to 1. Aside from the multiple image locations think about what happens if you have more then one image.
This is not uncommon in enterprises, an example could be a VDI image, an RDS image with Internet Explorer 1. Internet Explorer 1. This would mean that for MCS we copy not one image to 1. Think about the time and resources going into maintaining those images. My decision would therefore be to stick with Provisioning Services when you have more then a couple of datastores or images. This is my personal opinion and there are some very smart people who would judge differently on this one. Remember what I said before “With great best practices come great responsibility!
Never stop thinking!”. So here we go; let’s help you decide between Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services 2.
So many things changed over the last few years and it is time to re- evaluate the decision tree. Remember that this is just me sharing my decisions and everyone is entitled to their own ideas. When you disagree on a decision please let me know in a comment, when I agree I will change the decision tree and if not. If there is a decision that ends up in either Provisioning Services or Machine Creation Services this doesn’t necessarily mean you are not allowed to use the other one as well.
You can mix and match Provisioning Services and Machine Creation Services. I like my designs to be as simple as possible so my advice would always be to actually make a choice and stick with it. I completely agree that it would be naive to say that this will always work but I’ll at least always try to do so. The first thing you should remember while deciding based on this decision tree is that this is my advice to you. If your choices end up on either Provisioning Services or Machine Creation services you could still decide to go either way.
I won’t hunt you down, I promise. There is only one technology choice that is an absolute no go and that is the first choice in regard to physical targets, this will always end up in using Provisioning Services. If this were a movie I would now say cut and wrap it all up. But with every movie there are some names at the end of it with names of people who contributed to the movie in some way. I’d like to thank some of the guys who shared their thoughts with me and with that helped me to be able to share this information.
Jim Moyle for his terrifying knowledge on IOPSDaniel Feller obviously for writing the first ever article on deciding between provisioning services vs machine creation services . Kees Baggerman for challenging me on a daily level and reviewing this article. Andrew Wood for reviewing. Shawn Bass for his sharp eye, saved me there!
Please leave a comment when you have new insights to add to the Citrix Provisioning Services vs Machine Creation Services decision tree.
Software Tip Library . It is the intention of the Software Library to serve as place for IT Professionals. By specifying related software when asking a question or when posting a. Software Library. As we continue to refine the database.
Entries more popular (with more tips, followers, comments, etc.) are easier to find and so. If you do not see.