PlateSpin and VMware Converter Comparison

P2V Product Comparison

This is just a short overview of a couple of products that I have been comparing for a large amount of workloads.

PlateSpin and VMware vCenter Converter both perform Virtual-to-Virtual (V2V) server migrations to VMware virtualisation platforms. vCenter Converter however lacks many time and labour-saving automation capabilities, which leads to higher amounts of manual intervention during and after migrations, and hence a higher Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).

PlateSpin will automatically error check each migration to ensure data integrity and logon to each server after completion. Unfortunately, VMware Converter does not offer this feature and after each migration, the servers will need to be manually checked to confirm the server can logon and the applications are in a stable condition.

For data integrity, vCenter Converter does not offer Service control for non-VSS compliant services capability. Both vCenter Converter and PlateSpin Migrate use VSS snapshotting in the source workload during replications. This enhances data integrity for VSS compliant applications. However, not all applications are VSS compliant. For non-VSS compliant applications, PlateSpin Migrate offers the ability to have these applications automatically flush their data each time a VSS snapshot is taken, prior to replication.

vCenter Converter does not automatically install VMware tools in Linux workloads as part of the migration process. This means that the tools must be installed manually after the migration is done.

PlateSpin Migrate gives users the option to automatically install the VMware tools in Linux workloads as part of the migration process.

Stability

PlateSpin Migrate has the following features on board:

40 concurrent migrations: a single PlateSpin Migrate server supports up to 40 concurrent migrations, vs only 12 for vCenter Converter. This means that for the same number of workloads to be migrated, only one third of the migration servers is needed when using PlateSpin Migrate. This makes the project a lot more manageable and also further eliminates risk of human error.

 

Fault tolerance: PlateSpin Migrate offers a fault tolerant data transfer that can withstand disruptions in network connectivity. In contrast, vCenter Converter migration jobs fail if the source and target lose connectivity. Especially for larger projects this can create a significant amount of manual overhead.

 

Compression: the ability to compress the data transferred between the source and target can drastically reduce the time and bandwidth needed to migrate a given workload. PlateSpin Migrate can define a per-migration compression level, while vCenter Converter cannot.

 

Progress and event email notification: PlateSpin Migrate is capable of sending email notifications on migration job progress and any warnings or failures. This enables visibility and thus corrective actions without someone having to sit in front of the product console all the time. vCenter Converter does not have this capability.

 

Occasionally it is necessary to migrate back to the original source after production changes have already begun on the target. vCenter Converter does not offer an integrated way to fail back to the source, whereas PlateSpin Migrate offers a failback solution capable of restoring the use of the original source machine.