When I was in Europe presenting some sessions at conferences and doing some seminars last month I meet and spoke with one of the attendees at the StorageExpo Holland event. The persons name (Han Breemer) came up to visit with me after one of my presentations that include SSD is in your future: When, where, with what and how, and Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking industry trends and perspectives. Note you can find additional material from various conferences and events on the Downloads page accessible via the resources menu on the StorageIO web site.
As I always do, I invite attendees to feel free and follow-up via email, twitter, Linked In, Google+ or other venue with questions, comments, discussions and what they are seeing or running into in their environments.
Some of the many different items discussed during my StorageExpo presentations included:
- The best IO is the IO that you do not have to do.
- How much SSD do you want vs. need?
- Has SSD been effective in storage arrays?
- No such thing as a data or information recession
- IT economic challenges
- Modernizing data protection
- Cloud concerns and gaining confidence
- Does garbage big data in result in big garbage data out
- Flash and DRAM, Dejavu or something new?
- Little data, big data, very big data or big BS?
- How many degrees of separation between you and your information
- RAID, IOP’s and performance observations
- Not all applications and thus backup, BC and DR should be treated the same
Recently Hans followed up and sent me some comments and asked if I would be willing to share them with others such as who ever happens to read this. I also suggested to Hans that he also start a blog (here is link to his new blog), and that I would be happy to post his comments for others to see and join in the conversation which are shown below.
Hans Breemer wrote:
we met each other recently at the Dutch Storage Expo after one of your sessions. We briefly discussed the current trends in the storage market, and the “risks” or “threats” (read: challenges) it means to “us”, the storage guys. Often neglected by the sales guys…
Please allow me a few lines to elaborate a bit more and share some thoughts from the field. :-)
1. Bigger is not better?
Each iteration in the new disk technologies (SATA or SAS) means we get less IOPS for the bucks. Pound for pound that is. Of course the absolute amount of IOPS we can get from a HDD increases all the time. where 175 IOPS was top speed a few years ago, we sometimes see figures close to 220 IOPS per physical drive now. This looks good in the brochure, just as the increased capacity does. However, what the brochure doesn’t tell us that if we look at the IOPS/capacity ratio, we’re walking backwards. a few years ago we could easily sell over 1000 IOPS/TB. Currently we can’t anymore. We’re happy to reach 500 IOPS/TB. I know this has always been like that. However with the introduction of SATA in the enterprise storage world, I feel things have gotten even worse.
2. But how about SSD’s then?
True and agree. In the world of HDD’s growing bigger and bigger, we actually need SSD’s, and this technology is the way forward in an IOPS perspective. SSD’s have a great future ahead of them (despite being with us already for some time). I do doubt that at the moment SSD’s already have the economical ability to fill the gap though. They offer many of thousands of IOPS, and for dedicated high-end solutions they offer what we weren’t able to deliver for decades. More IOPS than you need! But what about the “1000 IOPS/TB” market? Let’s call it the middle market.
3. SSD’s as a lubricant?
You must have heard every vendor about Adaptive Storage Tiering, Auto Tiering etc. All based on the theorem that most of our IO’s come from a relative small disk section. Thus we can improve the total performance of our array by only adding a few percent of SSD. Smart technology identifies the hot tracks on our disks, and promotes these to SSD’s. We can even demote cold tracks to big SATA drives. Think green, think ecological footprint, etc. For many applications this works well. Regular Windows server, file servers, VMWare ESX server actually seems to like adaptive storage tiering ,and I think I know why, a positive tradeoff of using VMDK’s. (I might share a few lines about FAST VP do’s and dont’s next time if you don’t mind)
4. How about the middle market them you might ask? or, SSD’s as a band-aid?
For the middle market, the above developments is sort of disaster. Think SAP running on Sun Solaris, think the average Microsoft SQL Server, think Oracle databases. These are the typical applications that need “middle market” IOPS. Many of these applications have a freakish IO pattern. OLTP during daytime, backup in the evening and batch jobs at night. Not to mention end of month runs, DTA (Dev-Test-Acceptance) streets that sleep for two weeks or are constantly upgraded or restored. These applications hardly benefit from “smart technologies”. The IO behavior is too random, too unpredictable leading to saturated SATA pools, and EFD’s that are hardly doing more IO’s than the FC drives they’re supposed to relief. Add more SSD’s we’re told. Use less SATA we’re told. but it hardly works. Recently we acquired a few new Vmax arrays without EFD or FASTVP, for the sole purpose of hosting these typical middle market applications. Affordable, predictable performance. But then again, our existing Vmax 20k had full size 600GB 15rpm drives, with the Vmax 40k we’re “encouraged” to use small form factor 600GB 10krpm drives. Again a small step backwards?
5. The storage tiering debacle.
Last but not least, some words I’d like to share with you about storage tiering. We’re encouraged (again) to sell storage in different tiers. Makes sense. To some extent it does yes. Host you most IO eager application on expensive, SSD based storage. And host your DTA or other less business critical application on FC or SATA quality HDD’s. But what if the less business critical application needs to be backed up in the evening, and while doing so completely saturates your SATA pool? Or what if the Dev server creates just as many IO’s as the Prod environment does? People don’t seem to care it seems. To have people realize how much IO’s they actually need and use, we are reporting IO graphs for all servers in our environment. Our tiering model is based on IOPS/TB and IO response time.
Tier X would be expensive, offering 800 IOPS/TB @ avg 10ms
The next step will be to implement front end controls an actually limit a host to some ceiling. for instance, 2 times the limit described in the tier description. thus allowing for peak loads and backups.
Do we need to? I think so…
Greg, this small message is slowly turning into a plea. And that is actually what it is, a plea to our storage vendors, and to our evangelists. If they want us to deliver, I feel they should talk to us, and listen to us (and you!).
ps, I love my job, this world and my role to translate promises and demands into solutions that work for my customers. I do take care though not to create solution that will not work, despite what the brochure said.
pps, please feel free to share the above if needed.
Here is my response to Hans:
Hello Hans good to hear from you and thanks for the comments.
Great perspectives and in the course of talking with your peers around the world, you are not alone in your thinking.
Often I see disconnects between customers and vendors. Vendors (often driven by their market research) they know what the customer needs and issues are, and many actually do. However I often see a reliance on market research data with many degrees of separation as opposed to direct and candied insight. Likewise some vendors spend more time talking about how they listen to the customer vs. how time they actually do so.
On the other hand, I routinely see customers fall into the trap of communicating wants (nice to haves) instead of articulating needs (what is required). Then there is confusing industry adoption with customer deployment, not to mention concerns over vendor, technology or services lock-in.
Hope all else is well.
Check out Hans new blog and feel free to leave your comments and perspectives here or via other venues.
Ok, nuff said.
All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO All Rights Reserved