IT Industry Activity Archives

December 13, 2012January 18, 2021

Hardware, Software, what about Valueware?

I am surprised nobody has figured out how to use the term valueware to describe their hardware, software or services solutions, particular around cloud, big data, little data, converged solution stacks or bundles, virtualization and related themes.

Cloud and virtualization building blocks transformed into Valueware

Note that I’m referring to IT hardware and not what you would usually find at a TrueValue hardware store (disclosure, I like to shop there for things to innovate with and address the non IT to do project list).

Instead of value add software or what might otherwise be called an operating system (OS), or middleware, glue, hypervisor, shims or agents, I wonder who will be first to use valueware? Or who will be the first to say they were the first to articulate the value of their industry unique and revolutionary solution using valueware?

For those not familiar, converged solution stack bundles combine server, storage and networking hardware along with management software and other tools in a prepackaged solution from the same or multiple vendors. Examples include Dell VIS (not to be confused with their reference architectures or fish in Dutch), VCE or EMC vBlocks, IBM Puresystems, NetApp FlexPods and Oracle Exaboxes among others.

Why is it that the IT or ICT (for my European friends) industries are not using valueware?

Is Valueware not being used because it has not been brought to their attention yet or part of anybody’s buzzword bingo list or read about in an industry trade rag (publication) or blog (other than here) or on twitter?

Is it because the term value in some marketers opinion or view their research focus groups associate with being cheap or low-cost? If that is the case, I wonder how many of those marketing focus groups actually include active IT or ICT professionals. If those research marketing focus groups contact practicing IT or ICT pros, then there would be a lower degree of separation to the information, vs. professional focus group or survey participants who may have a larger degree of separation from practioneers.

Depending on who uses valueware first and how used, if it becomes popular or trendy, rest assured there would be bandwagon racing to the train station to jump on board the marketing innovation train.

On the other hand, using valueware could be an innovative way to help articulate soft product value (read more about hard and soft product here). For those not familiar, hard product does not simply mean hardware, it includes many technologies (including hardware, software, networks, services) that combined with best practices and other things to create a soft product (solution experience).

Whatever the reason, I am assuming that valueware is not going to be used by creative marketers so let us have some fun with it instead.

Let me rephrase that, let us leave valueware alone, instead look at the esteemed company it is in or with (some are for fun, some are for real).

APIware (having some fun with those who see the world via APIs)
Cloudware (not to be confused with cloud washing)
Firmware (software tied to hardware, is it hardware or software? ;) )
Hardware (something software, virtualization and clouds run on)
Innovationware (not to be confused with a data protection company called Innovation)
Larryware (anything Uncle Larry wants it to be)

Marketware (related to marketecture)
Middleware (software to add value or glue other software together)
Netware (RIP Ray Noorda)
Peopleware (those who use or support IT and cloud services)
Santaware (come on, tis the season right)
Sleepware (disks and servers spin down to sleep using IPM techniques)
Slideware (software defined marketing presentations)
Software (something that runs on hardware)
Solutionware (could be a variation of implementation of soft product)
Stackware (something that can also be done with Tupperware)
Tupperware (something that can be used for food storage)
Valueware (valueware.us points to this page, unless somebody wants to buy or rent it ;) )
Vaporware (does vaporware actually exist?)

More variations can be added to the above list, for example substituting ware for wear. However, I will leave that up to your own creativity and innovation skills.

Let’s see if anybody starts to use Valueware as part of their marketware or value proposition slideware pitches, and if you do use it, let me know, be happy to give you a shout out.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

December 12, 2012May 24, 2020

Predictions, did Mayans have it right, or did we read it wrong?

It is late in the day December 12, 2012 and best I can tell, we are still here, and for some, by time you read this it will be a few days or weeks later which means that either the Mayan calendar had it wrong, or we misinterpret it. Some would say that December 12, 2012 is not the important date, that it is really December 21, 2012 that the world will end, ok, lets wait and see what happens in a few more days.

However taking a step back from the Mayan calendar it dawned on me that some predictions such today’s Mayan calendar forecast is similar to others that happen around this time of the year. That is the annual information technology or IT related predictions made by pundits or anybody else with an opinion, most of which in theory their concepts are not even close. Granted many predictions make good press and media things to read or listen to for entertainment. In some cases, these predictions are variations of what we’re predicted last year in 2011 and the year before in 2010 and they year before that and so forth.

I’m still working on my predictions for 2013 and forward-looking into 2014, however I keep getting interrupted fending off vendors and their PR surrogates calling or emailing asking me if they can make contributions, or write my list for me (how thoughtful of them ;) ). For now one of my predictions is that I hope to get my predictions for 2013 done before 2013, however if you need something to hold you over, check this out from last year, or this from a few months ago.

I will also say that for 2013, those who see or view cloud, virtualization, big data (and little data) in pragmatic terms will be very prosperous. On the other hand, those who have narrow or constrained views will be envious of the others. Likewise plenty of new additions to the buzzword bingo line up with software defined having strong representation.

Like the Mayan calendar predictions, with annual technology predictions, are we reading them wrong, or are they simply wrong and who if anybody cares, or are they just garbage in and garbage out, or big data garbage in, big data garbage out results?

In the meantime, I need to check that my local and cloud backups are working, try a restore test, have plenty of cash on hand, gas tanks full, cerveza in the fridge, propane for the generator and other things ready if the Mayans had it right, just off by a few days ;) .

Ok, nuff said (for now).

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

December 6, 2012November 26, 2023

Storage comments from the field and customers in the trenches

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 backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving 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:

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:

Hi Greg,

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
Tier Y would be the cheaper option offering 400 IOPS/TB @ avg 15 ms

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!).

Cheers,

Hans Breemer

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.

Cheers
gs

Check out Hans new blog and feel free to leave your comments and perspectives here or via other venues.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

December 3, 2012July 7, 2020

HPs big December 3rd storage announcement

HP has been talking and promoting for several weeks (ok, months) their upcoming December 3rd storage announcements from the HP discovery event in Frankfurt Germany.

Well its now afternoon which means the early Monday morning December 3rd embargos have been lifted so I can now talk about what HP shared last Friday about todays announcements. Basically what I received was a series of press releases as well link to their updated web site providing information about todays announcements.

HP Redefines Storage Simplicity with Single Architecture for Enterprises of All Sizes
HP Expands 3PAR Storage Portfolio
HP Extends Enterprise-class Backup and Recovery Across Entire StoreOnce Portfolio
New HP Storage Services Transform How Organizations Manage, Store and Protect Data
HP StoreAll Storage Brings Real-time Intelligence to Big Data Retention and Cloud Storage Customers
HP Introduces HP Capacity on Demand

HP has enhanced the 3PAR aka P10000 with new models including for entry-level, as well as for higher performance enterprises needs. This also should beg the question for many longtime EVA (excuse me, P6000) customers, have they hit the end of the line? For scale out storage, HP has the StoreAll solutions (think about products formerly marketed as certain X9000 models based on Ibrix) with enhancements for analytics, bulk and various types of big data. In addition HP has enhanced its backup and recovery capabilities and Dedupe products including integration with Autonomy (here and here) along with capacity on demand services.

New 3PAR (P10000 models)

New StoreAll storage system

From the surface and what I have been able to see so far, looks like a good set of incremental enhancements from HP. Not much else to say until I can get some time to dig around deep to see what can be found on more details, however check out Calvin Zito (aka @hpstorageguy) the HP storage blogger who should have more information from HP.

Ok, nuff said (for now).

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 26, 2012July 28, 2021

Ceph Day Amsterdam 2012 (Object and cloud storage)

Recently while I was in Europe presenting some sessions at conferences and doing some seminars, I was invited by Ed Saipetch (@edsai) of Inktank.com to attend the first Ceph Day in Amsterdam.

Ceph day image

As luck or fate would turn out, I was in Nijkerk which is about an hour train ride from Amsterdam central station plus a free day in my schedule. After a morning train ride and nice walk from Amsterdam Central I arrived at the Tobacco Theatre (a former tobacco trading venue) where Ceph Day was underway, and in time for lunch of Krokettens sandwich.

Lets take a quick step back and address for those not familiar what is Ceph (Cephalanthera) and why it was worth spending a day to attend this event. Ceph is an open source distributed object scale out (e.g. cluster or grid) software platform running on industry standard hardware.

Ceph is used for deploying object storage, cloud storage and managed services, general purpose storage for research, commercial, scientific, high performance computing (HPC) or high productivity computing (commercial) along with backup or data protection and archiving destinations. Other software similar in functionality or capabilities to Ceph include OpenStack Swift, Basho Riak CS, Cleversafe, Scality and Caringo among others. There are also the tin wrapped software (e.g. appliances or pre-packaged) solutions such as Dell DX (Caringo), DataDirect Networks (DDN) WOS, EMC ATMOS and Centera, Amplidata and HDS HCP among others. From a service standpoint, these solutions can be used to build services similar Amazon S3 and Glacier, Rackspace Cloud files and Cloud Block, DreamHost DreamObject and HP Cloud storage among others.

At the heart of Ceph is RADOS a distributed object store that consists of peer nodes functioning as object storage devices (OSD). Data can be accessed via REST (Amazon S3 like) APIs, Libraries, CEPHFS and gateway with information being spread across nodes and OSDs using a CRUSH based algorithm (note Sage Weil is one of the authors of CRUSH: Controlled, Scalable, Decentralized Placement of Replicated Data). Ceph is scalable in terms of performance, availability and capacity by adding extra nodes with hard disk drives (HDD) or solid state devices (SSDs). One of the presentations pertained to DreamHost that was an early adopter of Ceph to make their DreamObjects (cloud storage) offering.

In addition to storage nodes, there are also an odd number of monitor nodes to coordinate and manage the Ceph cluster along with optional gateways for file access. In the above figure (via DreamHost), load balancers sit in front of gateways that interact with the storage nodes. The storage node in this example is a physical server with 12 x 3TB HDDs each configured as a OSD.

In the DreamHost example above, there are 90 storage nodes plus 3 management nodes, the total raw storage capacity (no RAID) is about 3PB (12 x 3TB = 36TB x 90 = 3.24PB). Instead of using RAID or mirroring, each objects data is replicated or copied to three (e.g. N=3) different OSDs (on separate nodes), where N is adjustable for a given level of data protection, for a usable storage capacity of about 1PB.

Note that for more usable capacity and lower availability, N could be set lower, or a larger value of N would give more durability or data protection at higher storage capacity overhead cost. In addition to using JBOD configurations with replication, Ceph can also be configured with a combination of RAID and replication providing more flexibility for larger environments to balance performance, availability, capacity and economics.

One of the benefits of Ceph is the flexibility to configure it how you want or need for different applications. This can be in a cost-effective hardware light configuration using JBOD or internal HDDs in small form factor generally available servers, or high density servers and storage enclosures with optional RAID adapters along with SSD. This flexibility is different from some cloud and object storage systems or software tools which take a stance of not using or avoiding RAID vs. providing options and flexibility to configure and use the technology how you see fit.

Here are some links to presentations from Ceph Day:
Introduction and Welcome by Wido den Hollander
Ceph: A Unified Distributed Storage System by Sage Weil
Ceph in the Cloud by Wido den Hollander
DreamObjects: Cloud Object Storage with Ceph by Ross Turk
Cluster Design and Deployment by Greg Farnum
Notes on Librados by Sage Weil

While at Ceph day, I was able to spend a few minutes with Sage Weil Ceph creator and founder of inktank.com to record a pod cast (listen here) about what Ceph is, where and when to use it, along with other related topics. Also while at the event I had a chance to sit down with Curtis (aka Mr. Backup) Preston where we did a simulcast video and pod cast. The simulcast involved Curtis recording this video with me as a guest discussing Ceph, cloud and object storage, backup, data protection and related themes while I recorded this pod cast.

One of the interesting things I heard, or actually did not hear while at the Ceph Day event that I tend to hear at related conferences such as SNW is a focus on where and how to use, configure and deploy Ceph along with various configuration options, replication or copy modes as opposed to going off on erasure codes or other tangents. In other words, instead of focusing on the data protection protocol and algorithms, or what is wrong with the competition or other architectures, the Ceph Day focused was removing cloud and object storage objections and enablement.

Where do you get Ceph? You can get it here, as well as via 42on.com and inktank.com.

Thanks again to Sage Weil for taking time out of his busy schedule to record a pod cast talking about Ceph, as well 42on.com and inktank for hosting, and the invitation to attend the first Ceph Day in Amsterdam.

Returning to Amsterdam central station after Ceph Day

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 26, 2012January 1, 2020

Seven databases in seven weeks, a book review of NoSQL databases

Seven Databases in Seven Weeks (A Guide to Modern Databases and the NoSQL Movement) is a book written Eric Redmond (@coderoshi) and Jim Wilson (@hexlib), part of The Pragmatic Programmers (@pragprog) series that takes a look at several non SQL based database systems.

Coverage includes PostgreSQL, Riak, Apache HBase, MongoDB, Apache CouchDB, Neo4J and Redis with plenty of code and architecture examples. Also covered include relational vs. key value, columnar and document based systems among others.

The details: Seven Databases in Seven Weeks
Paperback: 352 pages
Publisher: Pragmatic Bookshelf (May 18, 2012)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1934356921
ISBN-13: 978-1934356920
Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 0.8 x 9 inches

Buzzwords (or keywords) include availability, consistency, performance and related themes. Others include MongoDB, Cassandra, Redis, Neo4J, JSON, CouchDB, Hadoop, HBase, Amazon Dynamo, Map Reduce, Riak (Basho) and Postgres along with data models including relational, key value, columnar, document and graph along with big data, little data, cloud and object storage.

While this book is not a how to tutorial or installation guide, it does give a deep dive into the different databases covered. The benefit is gaining an understanding of what the different databases are good for, strengths, weakness, where and when to use or choose them for various needs.

A look inside my copy of Seven Databases in Seven Days

Who should this book includes applications developers, programmers, Cloud, big data and IT/ICT architects, planners and designers along with database, server, virtualization and storage professionals. What I like about the book is that it is a great intro and overview along with sufficient depth to understand what these different solutions can and cannot do, when, where and why to use these tools for different situations in a quick read format and plenty of detail.

Would I recommend buying it: Yes, I bought a copy myself on Amazon.com, get your copy by clicking here.

Ok, nuff said

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 24, 2012January 23, 2019

Garbage data in, garbage information out, big data or big garbage?

Do you know the computer technology saying, garbage data in results in garbage information out?

In other words even with the best algorithms and hardware, bad, junk or garbage data put in results in garbage information delivered. Of course, you might have data analysis and cleaning software to look for, find and remove bad or garbage data, however that’s for a different post on another day.

If garbage data in results in garbage information out, does garbage big data in result in big garbage out?

I’m sure my sales and marketing friends or their surrogates will jump at the opportunity to tell me why and how big data is the solution to the decades old garbage data in problem.

Likewise they will probably tell me big data is the solution to problems that have not even occurred or been discovered yet, yeah right.

However garbage data does not discriminate or show preference towards big data or little data, in fact it can infiltrate all types of data and systems.

Lets shift gears from big and little data to how all of that information is protected, backed up, replicated, copied for HA, BC, DR, compliance, regulatory or other reasons. I wonder how much garbage data is really out there and many garbage backups, snapshots, replication or other copies of data exist? Sounds like a good reason to modernize data protection.

If we don’t know where the garbage data is, how can we know if there is a garbage copy of the data for protection on some other tape, disk or cloud. That also means plenty of garbage data to compact (e.g. compress and dedupe) to cut its data footprint impact particular with tough economic times.

Does this mean then that the cloud is the new destination for garbage data in different shapes or forms, from online primary to back up and archive?

Does that then make the cloud the new virtual garbage dump for big and little data?

Hmm, I think I need to empty my desktop trash bin and email deleted items among other digital house keeping chores now.

On the other hand, just had a thought about orphaned data and orphaned storage, however lets leave those sleeping dogs lay where they rest for now.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 24, 2012November 26, 2023

SSD, flash and DRAM, DejaVu or something new?

Recently I was in Europe for a couple of weeks including stops at Storage Networking World (SNW) Europe in Frankfurt, StorageExpo Holland, Ceph Day in Amsterdam (object and cloud storage), and Nijkerk where I delivered two separate 2 day, and a single 1 day seminar.

Image of Frankfurt transtation Image of inside front of ICE train going from Frankfurt to Utrecht

At the recent StorageExpo Holland event in Utrecht, I gave a couple of presentations, one on cloud, virtualization and storage networking trends, the other taking a deeper look at Solid State Devices (SSD’s). As in the past, StorageExpo Holland was great in a fantastic venue, with many large exhibits and great attendance which I heard was over 6,000 people over two days (excluding exhibitor vendors, vars, analysts, press and bloggers) which was several times larger than what was seen in Frankfurt at the SNW event.

Image of Ilja Coolen (twitter @@iCoolen) who was session host for SSD presentation in Utrecht Image of StorageExpo Holland exhibit show floor in Utrecht

Both presentations were very well attended and included lively interactive discussion during and after the sessions. The theme of my second talk was SSD, the question is not if, rather what to use where, how and when which brings us up to this post.

For those who have been around or using SSD for more than a decade outside of cell phones, camera, SD cards or USB thumb drives, that probably means DRAM based with some form of data persistency mechanisms. More recently mention SSD and that implies nand flash-based, either MLC or eMLC or SLC or perhaps emerging mram or PCM. Some might even think of NVRAM or other forms of SSD including emerging mram or mem-resistors among others, however lets stick to nand flash and dram for now.

Often in technology what is old can be new, what is new can be seen as old, if you have seen, experienced or done something before you will have a sense of DejaVu and it might be evolutionary. On the other hand, if you have not seen, heard, experienced, or found a new audience, then it can be revolutionary or maybe even an industry first ;).

Technology evolves, gets improved on, matures, and can often go in cycles of adoption, deployment, refinement, retirement, and so forth. SSD in general has been an on again, off again type cycle technology for the past several decades except for the past six to seven years. Normally there is an up cycle tied to different events, servers not being fast enough or affordable so use SSD to help address performance woes, or drives and storage systems not being fast enough and so forth.

Btw, for those of you who think that the current SSD focused technology (nand flash) is new, it is in fact 25 years old and still evolving and far from reaching its full potential in terms of customer deployment opportunities.

Nand flash memory has helped keep SSD practical for the past several years riding the similar curve that is keeping hard disk drives (HDD’s) that they were supposed to replace alive. That is improved reliability, endurance or duty cycle, better annual failure rate (AFR), larger space capacity, lower cost, and enhanced interfaces, packaging, power and functionality.

DRAM historically at least for enterprise has been the main option for SSD based solutions using some form of data persistency. Data persistency options include battery backup combined with internal HDD’s to de stage information from the DRAM before power was lost. TMS (recently bought by IBM) was one of the early SSD vendors from the DRAM era that made the transition to flash including being one of the first many years ago to combine DRAM as a cache layer over nand flash as a persistency or de-stage layer. This would be an example of if you were not familiar with TMS back then and their capacities, you might think or believe that some more recent introductions are new and revolutionary, and perhaps they are in their own right or with enough caveats and qualifiers.

An emerging trend, which for some will be Dejavu, is that of using more DRAM in combination with nand flash SSD.

Oracle is one example of a vendor who IMHO rather quietly (intentionally or accidentally) has done this in the 7000 series storage systems as well as ExaData based database storage systems. Rest assured they are not alone and in fact many of the legacy large storage vendors have also piled up large amounts of DRAM based cache in their storage systems. For example EMC with 2TByte of DRAM cache in their VMAX 40K, or similar systems from Fujitsu HP, HDS, IBM and NetApp (including recent acquisition of DRAM based CacheIQ) among others. This has also prompted the question of if SSD has been successful in traditional storage arrays, systems or appliances as some would have you believe not, click here to learn more and cast your vote.

So is the future in the past? Some would say no, some will say yes, however IMHO there are lessons to learn and leverage from the past while looking and moving forward.

Early SSD’s were essentially RAM disks, that is a portion of main random access memory (RAM) or what we now call DRAM set aside as a non persistent (unless battery backed up) cache or device. Using a device driver, applications could use the RAM disk as though it were a normal storage system. Different vendors springing up with drivers for various platforms and disappeared as their need were reduced with faster storage systems, interfaces and ram disks drives supplied by vendors, not to mention SSD devices.

Oh, for you tech trivia types, there was also database machines from the late 80’s such as Briton Lee that would offload your database processing functions to a specialized appliance. Sound like Oracle ExaData I, II or III to anybody?

Ok, so we have seen this movie before, no worries, old movies or shows get remade, and unless you are nostalgic or cling to the past, sure some of the remakes are duds, however many can be quite good.

Same goes with the remake of some of what we are seeing now. Sure there is a generation that does not know nor care about the past, its full speed ahead and leverage what will get them there.

Thus we are seeing in memory databases again, some of you may remember the original series (pick your generation, platform, tool and technology) with each variation getting better. With 64 bit processor, 128 bit and beyond file system and addressing, not to mention ability for more DRAM to be accessed directly, or via memory address extension, combined with memory data footprint reduction or compression, there is more space to put things (e.g. no such thing as a data or information recession).

Lets also keep in mind that the best IO is the IO that you do not have to do, and that SSD which is an extension of the memory map plays by the same rules of real estate. That is location matters.

Thus, here we go again for some of you (DejaVu), while for others get ready for a new and exciting ride (new and revolutionary). We are back to the future with in memory database which while for a time will take some pressure from underlying IO systems until they once again out grow server memory addressing limits (or IT budgets).

However for those who do not fall into a false sense of security, no fear, as there is no such thing as a data or information recession. Sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, sooner or later those IO’s that were or are being kept in memory will need to be de-staged to persistent storage, either nand flash SSD, HDD or somewhere down the road PCM, mram and more.

There is another trend that with more IOs being cached, reads are moving to where they should resolve which is closer to the application or via higher up in the memory and IO pyramid or hierarchy (shown above).

Thus, we could see a shift over time to more writes and ugly IOs being sent down to the storage systems. Keep in mind that any cache historically provides temporal relieve, question is how long of a temporal relief or until the next new and revolutionary or DejaVu technology shows up.

Ok, go have fun now, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 24, 2012January 23, 2019

Is SSD only for performance?

Normally solid state devices (SSD) including non-persistent DRAM, and persistent nand flash are thought of in the context of performance including bandwidth or throughput, response time or latency, and IOPS or transactions. However there is another role where SSD are commonly used where the primary focus is not performance. Besides consumer devise such as iPhones, iPads, iPods, Androids, MP3, cell phones and digital cameras, the other use is for harsh environments.

Harsh environments include those (both commercial and government) where use of SSDs are a solution to vibration or other rough handling. These include commercial and military aircraft, telemetry and mobile command, control and communications, energy exploration among others.

What’s also probably not commonly thought about is that the vendors or solution providers for the above specialized environments include mainstream vendors including IBM (via their TMS acquisition) and EMC among others. Yes, EMC is involved with deploying SSD in different environments including all nand flash-based VNX systems.

In a normal IT environment, vibration should not be an issue for storage devices assuming quality solutions with good enclosures are used. However some environments that are pushing the limits on density may become more susceptible to vibration. Not all of those use cases will be SSD opportunities, however some that can leverage IO density along with tolerance to vibration will be a good fit.

Does that mean HDDs can not or should not be used in high density environments where vibration can be an issue?

That depends.

If the right drive enclosures, type of drive are used following manufactures recommendations, then all should be good. Keep in mind that there are many options to leverage SSD for various scenarios.

Which tool or technology to use when, where or how much will depend on the specific situation, or perhaps your preferences for a given product or approach.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 24, 2012November 26, 2023

Data Center Infrastructure Management (DCIM) and IRM

There are many business drivers and technology reasons for adopting data center infrastructure management (DCIM) and infrastructure Resource Management (IRM) techniques, tools and best practices. Today’s agile data centers need updated management systems, tools, and best practices that allow organizations to plan, run at a low-cost, and analyze for workflow improvement. After all, there is no such thing as an information recession driving the need to move process and store more data. With budget and other constraints, organizations need to be able to stretch available resources further while reducing costs including for physical space and energy consumption.

The business value proposition of DCIM and IRM includes:

End to End (E2E) insight into IT resources (facilities, hardware, software, tools, people)
Timely access to information about IT resources and inventory for decision making
Metrics and measurements for service planning, budgeting, and compliance audits
Enhance efficiency and productivity stretching available budgets further
Agility and flexibility to adapt to changing business conditions
Improve reliability, availability, serviceability (RAS) and Quality of Service (QoS)
Eliminate islands or pockets of underutilized hardware and software resources
Removing complexity and waste which results in cost savings
Meet service level agreements (SLA) and service level objectives (SLO)

DCIM, Data Center, Cloud and storage management figure

Data Center Infrastructure Management or DCIM also known as IRM has as their names describe a focus around management resources in the data center or information factory. IT resources include physical floor and cabinet space, power and cooling, networks and cabling, physical (and virtual) servers and storage, other hardware and software management tools. For some organizations, DCIM will have a more facilities oriented view focusing on physical floor space, power and cooling. Other organizations will have a converged view crossing hardware, software, facilities along with how those are used to effectively deliver information services in a cost-effective way.

Common to all DCIM and IRM practices are metrics and measurements along with other related information of available resources for gaining situational awareness. Situational awareness enables visibility into what resources exist, how they are configured and being used, by what applications, their performance, availability, capacity and economic effectiveness (PACE) to deliver a given level of service. In other words, DCIM enabled with metrics and measurements that matter allow you to avoid flying blind to make prompt and effective decisions.

DCIM, Data Center and Cloud Metrics Figure

DCIM comprises the following:

Facilities, power (primary and standby, distribution), cooling, floor space
Resource planning, management, asset and resource tracking
Hardware (servers, storage, networking)
Software (virtualization, operating systems, applications, tools)
People, processes, policies and best practices for management operations
Metrics and measurements for analytics and insight (situational awareness)

The evolving DCIM model is around elasticity, multi-tenant, scalability, flexibility, and is metered and service-oriented. Service-oriented, means a combination of being able to rapidly give new services while keeping customer experience and satisfaction in mind. Also part of being focused on the customer is to enable organizations to be competitive with outside service offerings while focusing on being more productive and economic efficient.

DCIM, Data Center and Cloud E2E management figure

While specific technology domain areas or groups may be focused on their respective areas, interdependencies across IT resource areas are a matter of fact for efficient virtual data centers. For example, provisioning a virtual server relies on configuration and security of the virtual environment, physical servers, storage and networks along with associated software and facility related resources.

You can read more about DCIM, ITSM and IRM in this white paper that I did, as well as in my books Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press) and The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press).

Ok, nuff said, for now.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 21, 2012November 3, 2024

IBM vs. Oracle, NAD intervenes, again

With HP announcing that they were sold a bogus deal with Autonomy (read here, here and here among others) and the multi billion write off (loss), or speculation of who will be named the new CEO of Intel in 2013, don’t worry if you missed the latest in the ongoing IBM vs. Oracle campaign. The other day the NAD (National Advertising Directive) part of the Better Business Bureau (BBB) issued yet another statement about IBM and Oracle (read here and posted below).

NAD BBB logo

In case you had not heard, earlier this year, Oracle launched an advertising promotion touting how much faster their solutions are vs. IBM. Perhaps you even saw the advertising billboards along highways or in airports making the Oracle claims.

Big Blue (e.g. IBM) being the giant that they are was not going take the Oracle challenge sitting down and stepped up and complained to the better business bureau (BBB). As a result, the NAD issued a decision for Oracle to stop the ads (read more here). Oracle at 37.1B (May 2012 annual earnings) is about a third the size of IBM at 106.9B (2011 earnings), thus neither is exactly a small business.

Lets get back to the topic at hand the NAD issued yet another directive. In the latest spat, after the first Ads, Oracle launched the 10M challenge (you can read about that here).

Once again the BBB and the NAD weighs in for IBM and issued the following statement (mentioned above):

For Immediate Release
Contact: Linda Bean
212.705.0129

NAD Determines Oracle Acted Properly in Discontinuing Performance Claim Couched in ‘Contest’ Language

New York, NY – Nov. 20, 2012 – The National Advertising Division has determined that Oracle Corporation took necessary action in discontinuing advertising that stated its Exadata server is “5x Faster Than IBM … Or you win $10,000,000.”

The claim, which appeared in print advertising in the Wall Street Journal and other major newspapers, was challenged before NAD by International Business Machines Corporation.

NAD is an investigative unit of the advertising industry system of self-regulation and is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

As an initial matter, NAD considered whether or not Oracle’s advertisement conveyed a comparative performance claim – or whether the advertisement simply described a contest.

In an NAD proceeding, the advertiser is obligated to support all reasonable interpretations of its advertising claims, not just the message it intended to convey. In the absence of reliable consumer perception evidence, NAD uses its judgment to determine what implied messages, if any, are conveyed by an advertisement.

Here, NAD found that, even accounting for a sophisticated target audience, a consumer would be reasonable to take away the message that all Oracle Exadata systems run five times as fast as all IBM’s Power computer products. NAD noted in its decision that the fact that the claim was made in the context of a contest announcement did not excuse the advertiser from its obligation to provide substantiation.

The advertiser did not provide any speed performance tests, examples of comparative system speed superiority or any other data to substantiate the message that its Exadata computer systems run data warehouses five times as fast as IBM Power computer systems.

Accordingly, NAD determined that the advertiser’s decision to permanently discontinue this advertisement was necessary and appropriate. Further, to the extent that Oracle reserves the right to publish similar advertisements in the future, NAD cautioned that such performance claims require evidentiary support whether or not the claims are couched in a contest announcement.

Oracle, in its advertiser’s statement, said it disagreed with NAD’s findings, but would take “NAD’s concerns into account should it disseminate similar advertising in the future.”

###

NAD’s inquiry was conducted under NAD/CARU/NARB Procedures for the Voluntary Self-Regulation of National Advertising. Details of the initial inquiry, NAD’s decision, and the advertiser’s response will be included in the next NAD/CARU Case Report.

About Advertising Industry Self-Regulation: The Advertising Self-Regulatory Council establishes the policies and procedures for advertising industry self-regulation, including the National Advertising Division (NAD), Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), National Advertising Review Board (NARB), Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program (ERSP) and Online Interest-Based Advertising Accountability Program (Accountability Program.) The self-regulatory system is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

Self-regulation is good for consumers. The self-regulatory system monitors the marketplace, holds advertisers responsible for their claims and practices and tracks emerging issues and trends. Self-regulation is good for advertisers. Rigorous review serves to encourage consumer trust; the self-regulatory system offers an expert, cost-efficient, meaningful alternative to litigation and provides a framework for the development of a self-regulatory to emerging issues.

To learn more about supporting advertising industry self-regulation, please visit us at: www.asrcreviews.org.

Linda Bean Director, Communications,
Advertising Self-Regulatory Council

Tel: 212.705.0129
Cell: 908.812.8175
lbean@asrc.bbb.org

112 Madison Ave.
3rd Fl.
New York, NY
10016

Not surprisingly, IBM sent the following email to highlight their latest news:

Greg,

For the third time in eight months Oracle has agreed to kill a misleading advertisement targeting IBM after scrutiny from the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division.

Oracle’s ‘$10 Million Challenge’ ad claimed that its Exadata server was ‘Five Times Faster than IBM Power or You Win $10,000,000.’ The advertising council just issued a press release announcing that the claim was not supported by the evidence in the record, and that Oracle has agreed to stop making the claim. ‘[Oracle] did not provide speed performance tests, examples of comparative systems speed superiority or any other data to substantiate its message,’ the BBB says in the release: The ads ran in The Wall Street Journal, The Economist, Chief Executive Magazine, trade publications and online.

The National Advertising Division reached similar judgments against Oracle advertising on two previous occasions this year. Lofty and unsubstantiated claims about Oracle systems being ‘Twenty Times Faster than IBM’ and ‘Twice as Fast Running Java’ were both deemed to be unsubstantiated and misleading. Oracle quietly shelved both campaigns.

If you follow Oracle’s history of claims, you won’t be surprised that the company issues misleading ads until they’re called out in public and forced to kill the campaign. As far back as 2001, Oracle’s favorite tactic has been to launch unsubstantiated attacks on competitors in ads while promising prize money to anyone who can disprove the bluff. Not surprisingly, no prize money is ever paid as the campaigns wither under scrutiny. They are designed to generate publicity for Oracle, nothing more. You may be familiar with their presentation, ‘Ridding the Market of Competition,’ which they issued to the Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals laying out their strategy.

The repeated rulings by the BBB even caused analyst Rob Enderle to comment that, ‘there have been significant forced retractions and it is also apparent that increasingly the only people who could cite these false Oracle performance advantages with a straight face were Oracle’s own executives, who either were too dumb to know they were false or too dishonest to care.’

Let me know if you’re interested in following up on this news. You won’t hear anything about it from Oracle.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Rubsamen
Worldwide Communications for PureSystems and Cloud Computing
IBM Systems & Technology Group
aim: crubsamen
twitter: @crubsamen

Wow, I never knew however I should not be surprised that there is a Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals.

Now Oracle is what they are, aggressive and have a history of doing creative or innovative (e.g. stepping out-of-bounds) in sales and marketing campaigns, benchmarking and other activities. On the other hand has IBM been victimized at the hands of Oracle and thus having to resort to using the BBB and NAD as part of its new sales and marketing tool to counter Oracle?

Does anybody think that the above will cause Oracle to retreat, repent, and tone down how they compete on the field of sales and marketing of servers, storage, database and related IT, ICT, big and little data, clouds?

Anyone else have a visual of a group of IBMers sitting around a table at an exclusive country club enjoying a fine cigar along with glass of cognac toasting each other on their recent success in having the BBB and NAD issue another ruling against Oracle. Meanwhile perhaps at some left coast yacht club, the Oracle crew are high fiving, congratulating each other on their commission checks while spraying champagne all over the place like they just won the Americas cup race?

How about it Oracle, IBM says Im not going to hear anything from you, is that true?

Ok, nuff said (for now).

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 19, 2012November 26, 2023

Podcast: vBrownbags, vForums and VMware vTraining with Alastair Cooke

Now also available via

This is a new episode in the continuing StorageIO industry trends and perspectives pod cast series (you can view more episodes or shows along with other audio and video content here) as well as listening via iTunes or via your preferred means using this RSS feed (https://storageio.com/StorageIO_Podcast.xml)

In this episode, we go virtual, both with the topic (virtualization) and communicating around the world via Skype. My guest is Alastair Cooke (@DemitasseNZ) who joins me from New Zealand to talk about VMware education, training and social networking. Some of the topics that we cover include vForums, vBrownbags, VMware VCDX certification, VDI, Autolab, Professional vBrownbag tech talks, coffee and more. If you are into server virtualization or virtual desktop infrastructures (VDI), or need to learn more, Alastair talks about some great resources. Check out Alastairs site www.demitasse.co.nz for more information about the AutoLab, VMware training and education, along with the vBrownbag podcasts that are also available on iTunes as well as the APAC Virtualisation podcasts.

Click here (right-click to download MP3 file) or on the microphone image to listen to the conversation with Alastair and myself.

Also available via

Watch (and listen) for more StorageIO industry trends and perspectives audio blog posts pod casts and other upcoming events. Also be sure to heck out other related pod casts, videos, posts, tips and industry commentary at StorageIO.com and StorageIOblog.com.

Enjoy this episode vBrownbags, vForums and VMware vTraining with Alastair Cooke.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 14, 2012November 26, 2023

SSD past, present and future with Jim Handy

Now also available via

In this episode, I talk with SSD nand flash and DRAM chip analyst Jim Handy of Objective Analysis at the LSI AIS (Accelerating Innovation Summit) 2012 in San Jose. Our conversation includes SSD past, present and future, market and industry trends, who are doing what and things to keep an eye and ear, open for along with server, storage and memory convergence.

Click here (right-click to download MP3 file) or on the microphone image to listen to the conversation with Jim and myself.

Also available via

Enjoy this episode SSD Past, Present and Future with Jim Handy.

Ok, nuff said.

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

November 12, 2012November 26, 2023

Have SSDs been unsuccessful with storage arrays (with poll)?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

I hear people talking about how Solid State Devices (SSDs) have not been successful with or for vendors of storage arrays, particular legacy storage systems. Some people have also asserted that large storage arrays are dead at the hands of new purpose-built SSD appliances or storage systems (read more here).

As a reference, legacy storage systems include those from EMC (VMAX and VNX), IBM (DS8000, DCS3700, XIV, and V7000), and NetApp FAS along with those from Dell, Fujitsu, HDS, HP, NEC and Oracle among others.

Granted EMC have launched new SSD based solutions in addition to buying startup eXtremeIO (aka Project X), and IBM bought SSD industry veteran TMS. IMHO, neither of those actions by either vendor signals an early retirement for their legacy storage solutions, instead opening up new markets giving customers more options for addressing data center and IO performance challenges. Keep in mind that the best IO is the one that you do not have to do with the second best being the least impact to applications in a cost-effective way.

Sometimes I even hear people citing or using some other person or source to attribute or make their assertions sound authoritative. You know the game, according to XYZ or, ABC said blah blah blah blah. Of course if you say or repeat something often enough, or hear it again and again, it can become self-convincing (e.g. industry adoption vs. customer deployments). Likewise depending on how many degrees of separation exists between you and the information you get, the more that it can change from what it originally was.

So what about it, has SSD not been successful for legacy storage system vendors and is the only place that SSD has had success is with startups or non-array based solutions?

While there have been some storage systems (arrays and appliances) that may not perform up to their claimed capabilities due to various internal architecture or implementation bottlenecks. For the most part the large vendors including EMC, HP, HDS, IBM, NetApp and Oracle have done very well shipping SSD drives in their solutions. Likewise some of the clean sheet new design based startup systems, as well as some of the startups with hybrid solutions combing HDDs and SSDs have done well while others are still emerging.

This could also be an example where myth becomes reality based on industry adoption vs. customer deployment. What this means is that the myth is that it is the startups that are having success vs. the legacy vendors from an industry adoption conversation standpoint and thus believed by some.

On the other hand, the myth is that vendors such as EMC or NetApp have not had success with their arrays and SSD yet their customer deployments prove otherwise. There is also a myth that only PCIe based SSD can be of value and that drive based SSDs are not worth using which I have a good idea where that myth comes from.

IMHO it is a depends, however safe to say from what I have seen directly that there are some vendors of storage arrays, including so-called legacy systems that have had very good success with SSD. Likewise have seen where some startups have done ok with their new clean sheet designs, including EMC (Project X). Oh, at least for now I am not a believer that with the all SSD based project “X” over at EMC that the venerable VMAX formerly known as DMX and its predecessors Symmetric have finally hit the end of the line. Rather they will be positioned and play to different markets for some time yet.

Over at IBM I don’t think the DS8000 or XIV or V7000 and SVC folks are winding things down now that they bought SSD vendor TMS who has SSD appliances and PCIe cards. Rest assured there have been success by PCIe flash card vendors both as targets (FusionIO) and cache or hybrid cache and target systems such as those from Intel, LSI, Micron, and TMS (now IBM) among others. Oh, and if you have not noticed, check out what Qlogic, Emulex and some of the other traditional HBA vendors have done with and around SSD caching.

So where does the FUD that storage systems have not had success with SSD come from?

I suspect from those who would rather not see or hear about those who have had success taking away attention from them or their markets. In other words, using Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) or some community peer pressure, there is a belief by some that if you hear enough times that something is dead or not of a benefit; you will look at the alternatives.

Care to guess what the preferred alternative is for some? If you guessed a PCIe card or SSD based appliance from your favorite startup that would be a fair assumption.

On the other hand, my educated guess (ok, its much more informed than a guess ;) ) is that if you ask a vendor such as EMC or NetApp they would disagree, while at the same time articulate benefits of different approaches and tools. Likewise, my educated guess is that if you ask some others, they will say mixed things and of course if you talk with the pure plays, take a wild yet educated guess what they will say.

Here is my point.

The SSD market, including DRAM, nand flash (SLC or MLC or any other xLC), emerging PCM or future mram among other technologies and packaging options is still in its relative infancy. Yes, I know there have been significant industry adoption and many early customer deployments, however talking with IT organizations of all size as well as with vendors and vars, customer deployment of SSD is far from reaching its full potential meaning a bright future.

Simply putting an SSD, card or drive into a solution does not guarantee results.

Likewise having a new architecture does not guarantee things will be faster.

Fast storage systems need fast devices (HDD, HHDD and SSDs) along with fast interfaces to connect with fast servers. Put a fast HDD, HHDD or SSD into a storage system that has bottlenecks (hardware, software, architectural design) and you may not see the full potential of the technology. Likewise put fast ports or interfaces on a storage system that has fast devices however also a bottleneck in its controller has or system architecture and you will not realize the full potential of that solution.

This is not unique to legacy or traditional storage systems, arrays or appliances as it is also the case with new clean sheet designs.

There are many new solutions that are or should be as fast as their touted marketing stories present, however just because something looks impressive in a YouTube video or slide deck or WebEx does not mean it will be fast in your environment. Some of these new design SSD based solutions will displace some legacy storage systems or arrays while many others will find new opportunities. Similar to how previous generation SSD storage appliances found roles complementing traditional storage systems, so to will many of these new generation of products.

What this all means is to navigate your way through the various marketing and architecture debates, benchmarks battles, claims and counter claims to understand what fits your needs and requires.

What say you?

Ok, nuff said

Cheers
Gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press, 2009), and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier, 2004)

twitter @storageio

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: