metrics Archives

August 1, 2012November 25, 2019

What does new EMC and Lenovo partnership mean?

The past several weeks have been busy with various merger, acquisitions and collaborating activity in the IT and data storage world. Summer time often brings new relationships and even summer marriages. The most recent is EMC and Lenovo announcing a new partnership that includes OEM sourcing of technology, market expansion and other initiatives. Hmm, does anybody remember who EMCs former desktop and server partner was, or who put Lenovo out for adoption several years ago?

Here is the press release from EMC and Lenovo that you can read yourself vs. me simply paraphrasing it:

Lenovo and EMC Team Up In Strategic Worldwide Partnership
A Solid Step in Lenovo’s Aspiration to Be a Player in Industry Standard Servers and Networked Storage with EMC’s Leading Technology; EMC Further Strengthens Ability to Serve Customers’ Storage Solutions Needs in China and Other Emerging Markets; Companies Agree to Form SMB-Focused Storage Joint Venture
BEIJING, China – August 1, 2012
Lenovo (HKSE: 992) (ADR: LNVGY) and EMC Corporation (NYSE: EMC) today announced a broad partnership that enhances Lenovo’s position in industry standard servers and networked storage solutions, while significantly expanding EMC’s reach in China and other key, high-growth markets. The new partnership is expected to spark innovation and additional R&D in the server and storage markets by maximizing the product development talents and resources at both companies, while driving scale and efficiency in the partners’ respective supply chains.
The partnership is a strong strategic fit, leveraging the two leading companies’ respective strengths, across three main areas:

First, Lenovo and EMC have formed a server technology development program that will accelerate and extend Lenovo’s capabilities in the x86 industry-standard server segment. These servers will be brought to market by Lenovo and embedded into selected EMC storage systems over time.
Second, the companies have forged an OEM and reseller relationship in which Lenovo will provide EMC’s industry-leading networked storage solutions to its customers, initially in China and expanding into other global markets in step with the ongoing development of its server business.
Finally, EMC and Lenovo plan to bring certain assets and resources from EMC’s Iomega business into a new joint venture which will provide Network Attached Storage (NAS) systems to small/medium businesses (SMB) and distributed enterprise sites.

“Today’s announcement with industry leader EMC is another solid step in our journey to build on our foundation in PCs and become a leader in the new PC-plus era,” said Yuanqing Yang, Lenovo chairman and CEO. “This partnership will help us fully deliver on our PC-plus strategy by giving us strong back-end capabilities and business foundation in servers and storage, in addition to our already strong position in devices. EMC is the perfect partner to help us fully realize the PC-plus opportunity in the long term.”
Joe Tucci, chairman and CEO of EMC, said, “The relationship with Lenovo represents a powerful opportunity for EMC to significantly expand our presence in China, a vibrant and very important market, and extend it to other parts of the world over time. Lenovo has clearly demonstrated its ability to apply its considerable resources and expertise not only to enter, but to lead major market segments. We’re excited to partner with Lenovo as we focus our combined energies serving a broader range of customers with industry-leading storage and server solutions.”
In the joint venture, Lenovo will contribute cash, while EMC will contribute certain assets and resources of Iomega. Upon closing, Lenovo will hold a majority interest in the new joint venture. During and after the transition from independent operations to the joint venture, customers will experience continuity of service, product delivery and warranty fulfillment. The joint venture is subject to customary closing procedures including regulatory approvals and is expected to close by the end of 2012.
The partnership described here is not considered material to either company’s current fiscal year earnings.
About Lenovo
Lenovo (HKSE: 992) (ADR: LNVGY) is a $US30 billion personal technology company and the world’s second largest PC company, serving customers in more than 160 countries. Dedicated to building exceptionally engineered PCs and mobile internet devices, Lenovo’s business is built on product innovation, a highly efficient global supply chain and strong strategic execution. Formed by Lenovo Group’s acquisition of the former IBM Personal Computing Division, the Company develops, manufactures and markets reliable, high-quality, secure and easy-to-use technology products and services. Its product lines include legendary Think-branded commercial PCs and Idea-branded consumer PCs, as well as servers, workstations, and a family of mobile internet devices, including tablets and smart phones. Lenovo has major research centers in Yamato, Japan; Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen, China; and Raleigh, North Carolina. For more information, see www.lenovo.com.
About EMC
EMC Corporation is a global leader in enabling businesses and service providers to transform their operations and deliver IT as a service. Fundamental to this transformation is cloud computing. Through innovative products and services, EMC accelerates the journey to cloud computing, helping IT departments to store, manage, protect and analyze their most valuable asset — information — in a more agile, trusted and cost-efficient way. Additional information about EMC can be found at www.EMC.com.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

What is my take?

Disclosures
I have been buying and using Lenovo desktop and laptop products for over a decade and currently typing this post from my X1 ThinkPad equipped with a Samsung SSD. Likewise I bought an Iomega IX4 NAS a couple of years ago (so I am a customer), am a Retrospect customer (EMC bought and then sold them off), used to be a Mozy user (now a former customer) and EMC has been a client of StorageIO in the past.

Some of my Lenovo(s) and EMC Iomega IX4

Let us take a step back for a moment, Lenovo was the spinout and sale from IBM who has a US base in Raleigh North Carolina. While IBM still partners with Lenovo for desktops, IBM over the past years or decade(s) has been more strategically focused on big enterprise environments, software and services. Note that IBM has continued enhancing its own Intel based servers (e.g. xSeries), propriety Power processor series, storage and technology solutions (here, here, here and here among others). However, for the most part, IBM has moved away from catering to the Consumer, SOHO and SMB server, storage, desktop and related technology environments.

EMC on the other hand started out in the data center growing up to challenge IBMs dominance of data storage in big environments to now being the industry maker storage player for big and little data, from enterprise to cloud to desktop to server, consumer to data center. EMC also was partnered with Dell who competes directly with Lenovo until that relationship ended a few years ago. EMC for its part has been on a growth and expansion strategy adding technologies, companies, DNA and ability along with staff in the desktop, server and other spaces from a data, information and storage perspective not to mention VMware (virtualization and cloud), RSA (security) among others such as Mozy for cloud backup. EMC is also using more servers in its solutions ranging from Iomega based NAS to VNX unified storage systems, Greenplum big data to Centera archiving, ATMOS and various data protection solutions among other products.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

Note that this is an industry wide trend of leveraging Intel Architecture (IA) along with AMD, Broadcom, and IBM Power among other general-purpose processors and servers as platforms for running storage and data applications or appliances.

Overall, I think that this is a good move for both EMC and Lenovo to expand their reach into different adjacent markets leveraging and complimenting each other strengths.

Ok, lets see who is involved in the next IT summer relationship, 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

July 31, 2012May 8, 2022

Oracle, Xsigo, VMware, Nicira, SDN and IOV: IO IO its off to work they go

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

In case you missed it, VMware recently announced spending $1.05 billion USD acquiring startup Nicira for their virtualization and software technology that enables software defined networks (SDN). Also last week Oracle was in the news getting its hands slapped by for making misleading advertisement performance claims vs. IBM.

On the heals of VMware buying Nicira for software defined networking (SDN) or what is also known as IO virtualization (IOV) and virtualized networking, Oracle is now claiming their own SDN capabilities with their announcement of intent to acquire Xsigo. Founded in 2004, Xsigo has a hardware platform combined with software to enable attachment of servers to different Fibre Channel (SAN) and Ethernet based (LAN) networks with their version of IOV.

Now its Oracle who has announced that it will be acquiring IO, networking, virtualization hardware and software vendor Xsigo founded in 2004 for an undisclosed amount. Xsigo has made its name in the IO virtualization (IOV) and converged networking along with server and storage virtualization space over the past several years including partnerships with various vendors.

Technology buzzwords and buzz terms can often be a gray area leaving plenty of room for marketers and PR folks to run with. Case in point AaaS, Big data, Cloud, Compliance, Green, IaaS, IOV, Orchestration, PaaS and Virtualization among other buzzword bingo or XaaS topics. Since Xsigo has been out front in messaging and industry awareness around IO networking convergence of Ethernet based Local Area Networks (LANs) and Fibre Channel (FC) based Storage Area Networks (SANs), along with embracing InfiniBand, it made sense for them to play to their strength which is IO virtualization (aka IOV).

Too me and among others (here and here and here) it is interesting that Xsigo has not laid claims to being part of the software defined networking (SDN) movement or the affiliated OpenFlow networking initiatives as happens with Nicira (and Oracle for that matter). In the press release that the Oracle marketing and PR folks put out on a Monday morning, some of the media and press, both trade industry, financial and general news agency took the Oracle script hook line and sinker running with it.

What was effective is how well many industry trade pubs and their analysts simply picked up the press release story and ran with it in the all too common race to see who can get the news or story out first, or before it actually happens in some cases.

Image of media, news papers

Too be clear, not all pubs jumped including some of those mentioned by Greg Knieriemen (aka @knieriemen) over at SpeakinginTech highlights. I know some who took the time to call, ask around, leverage their journalistic training to dig, research and find out what this really meant vs. simply taking and running with the script. An example of one of those calls that I had was with Beth Pariseu (aka @pariseautt) that you can read her story here and here.

Interesting enough, the Xsigo marketers had not embraced the SDN term sticking with the more known (at least in some circles) VIO and VIO descriptions. What is also interesting is just last week Oracle marketing had their hands slapped by the Better Business Bureau (BBB) NAD after IBM complained about unfair performance based advertisements on ExaData.

Hmm, I wonder if the SDN police or somebody else will lodge a similar complaint with the BBB on behalf of those doing SDN?

Both Oracle and Xsigo along with other InfiniBand (and some Ethernet and PCIe) focused vendors are members of the Open Fabric initiative, not to be confused with the group working on OpenFlow.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

Here are some other things to think about:

Oracle has a history of doing different acquisitions without disclosing terms, as well as doing them based on earn outs such as was the case with Pillar.

Oracle use Ethernet in the servers and appliances as well as has been an adopter of InfiniBand primarily for node to node communication, however also for server to application.

Oracle is also an investor in Mellanox the folks that make InfiniBand and Ethernet products.

Oracle has built various stacks including ExaData (Database machine), Exalogic, Exalytics and Database Appliance in addition to their 7000 series of storage systems.

Oracle has done earlier virtualization related acquisitions including Virtual Iron.

Oracle has a reputation with some of their customers who love to hate them for various reasons.

Oracle has a reputation of being aggressive, even by other market leader aggressive standards.

Integrated solution stacks (aka stack wars) or what some remember as bundles continues and Oracle has many solutions.

What will happen to Xsigo as you know it today (besides what the press releases are saying).

While Xsigo was not a member of the Open Networking Forum (ONF), Oracle is.

Xsigo is a member of the Open Fabric Alliance along with Oracle, Mellanox and others interested in servers, PCIe, InfiniBand, Ethernet, networking and storage.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

What’s my take?

While there are similarities in that both Nicira and Xsigo are involved with IO Virtualization, what they are doing, how they are doing it, who they are doing it with along with where they can play vary.

Not sure what Oracle paid however assuming that it was in the couple of million dollars or less, cash or combination of stock, both they and the investors as well as some of the employees, friends and family’s did ok.

Oracle also gets some intellectual property that they can combine with other earlier acquisitions via Sun and Virtual Iron along with their investment in InfiniBand (also now Ethernet) vendor Mellanox

Likewise, Oracle gets some extra technology that they can leverage in their various stacked or integrated (aka bundled) solutions for both virtual and physical environments.

For Xsigo customers the good news is that you now know who will be buying the company, however and should be questions about the future beyond what is being said in press releases.

Does this acquisition give Oracle a play in the software defined networking space like Nicira gives to VMware I would say no given their hardware dependency, however it does give Oracle some extra technology to play with.

Likewise while important and a popular buzzword topic (e.g. SDN), since OpenFlow comes up in conversations, perhaps that should be more of the focus vs. if a solution is all software or hardware and software.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

I also find it entertaining how last week the Better Business Bureau (BBB) and NAD (National Advertising Division) slapped Oracles hands after IBM complaints of misleading performance claims about Oracle ExaData vs. IBM. The reason I find it entertaining is not that Oracle had its hands slapped or that IBM complained to the BBB, rather how the Oracle marketers and PR folks came up with a spin around what could be called a proprietary SDN (hmm, pSDN ?) story feed it to the press and media who then ran with it.

Im not convinced that this is an all our launch of a war by Oracle vs. Cisco let alone any of the other networking vendors as some have speculated (makes for good headlines though). Instead Im seeing it as more of an opportunistic acquisition by Oracle most likely at a good middle of summer price. Now if Oracle really wanted to go to battle with Cisco (and others), then there are others to buy such as Brocade, Juniper, etc etc etc. However there are other opportunities for Oracle to be focused (or side tracked on right now).

Oh, lets also see what Cisco has to say about all of this which should be interesting.

StorageIO industry trends and perspectives

If you are interested in learning more about IOV, Xisgo, or are having trouble sleeping, click here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, or here (I think that’s enough links for now ;).

Ok, nuff said for now as I have probably requalified for being on the Oracle you know what list for not sticking to the story script, opps, excuse me, I mean press release message.

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

July 26, 2012March 7, 2022

Data protection modernization, more than swapping out media

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Have you modernized your data protection strategy and environment?

If not, are you thinking about updating your strategy and environment?

Why modernize your data protection including backup restore, business continuance (BC), high availability (HA) and disaster recovery (DR) strategy and environment?

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Is it to leverage new technology such as disk to disk (D2D) backups, cloud, virtualization, data footprint reduction (DFR) including compression or dedupe?

Perhaps you have or are considering data protection modernization because somebody told you to or you read about it or watched a video or web cast? Or, perhaps your backup and restore are broke so its time to change media or try something different.

Lets take a step back for a moment and ask the question of what is your view of data protection modernization?

Perhaps it is modernizing backup by replacing tape with disk, or disk with clouds?

Maybe it is leveraging data footprint reduction (DFR) techniques including compression and dedupe?

How about instead of swapping out media, changing backup software?

Or what about virtualizing servers moving from physical machines to virtual machines?

On the other hand maybe your view of modernizing data protection is around using a different product ranging from backup software to a data protection appliance, or snapshots and replication.

The above and others certainly fall under the broad group of backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving, however there is another area which is not as much technology as it is techniques, best practices, processes and procedure based. That is, revisit why data and applications are being protected against what applicable threat risks and associated business risks.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

This means reviewing service needs and wants including backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving that in turn drive what data and applications to protect, how often, how many copies and where those are located, along with how long they will be retained.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Modernizing data protection is more than simply swapping out old or broken media like flat tires on a vehicle.

To be effective, data protection modernization involves taking a step back from the technology, tools and buzzword bingo topics to review what is being protected and why. It also means revisiting service level expectations and clarify wants vs. needs which translates to what if for free that is what is wanted, however for a cost then what is required.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Certainly technologies and tools play a role, however simply using new tools and techniques without revisiting data protection challenges at the source will result in new problems that resemble old problems.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Hence to support growth with a constrained or shrinking budget while maintaining or enhancing service levels, the trick is to remove complexity and costs.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

This means not treating all data and applications the same, stretch your available resources to be more effective without compromise on service is mantra of modernizing data protection.

Ok, nuff said for now, plenty more to discuss later.

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

July 26, 2012June 7, 2022

Modernizing data protection with certainty

Speaking of and about modernizing data protection, back in June I was invited to be a keynote presenter on industry trends and perspectives at a series of five dinner events (Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, Houston and New York City) sponsored by Quantum (that is a disclosure btw).

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

The theme of the dinner events was an engaging discussion around modernizing data protection with certainty along with clouds, virtualization and related topics. Quantum and one of their business partner resellers started the event with introductions followed by an interactive discussion by myself, followed by David Chappa (@davidchapa ) who ties the various themes with what Quantum is doing along with some of their customer success stories.

Themes and examples for these events build on my book Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking including:

Rethinking how, when, where and why data is being protected
Big data, little data and big backup issues and techniques
Archive, backup modernization, compression, dedupe and storage tiering
Service level agreements (SLA) and service level objectives (SLO)
Recovery time objective (RTO) and recovery point objective (RPO)
Service alignment and balancing needs vs. wants, cost vs. risk
Protecting virtual, cloud and physical environments
Stretching your available budget to do more without compromise
People, processes, products and procedures

Quantum is among other industry leaders with multiple technology and solution offerings for addressing different aspects of data footprint reduction and data protection modernization. These include for physical, virtual and cloud environments along with traditional tape, disk based, compression, dedupe, archive, big data, hardware, software and management tools. A diverse group of attendees have been at the different events including enterprise and SMB, public, private and government across different sectors.

Following are links to some blog posts that covered first series of events along with some of the specific themes and discussion points from different cities:

Via ITKE: The New Realities of Data Protection
Via ITKE: Looking For Certainty In The Cloud
Via ITKE: Success Stories in Data Protection: Cloud virtualization
Via ITKE: Practical Solutions for Data Protection Challenges
Via David Chappas blog

If you missed attending any of the above events, more dates are being added in August and September including stops in Cleveland, Raleigh, Atlanta, Washington DC, San Diego, Connecticut and Philadelphia with more details here.

Ok, nuff said for now, hope to see you at one of the upcoming events.

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

July 24, 2012May 8, 2022

NAD recommends Oracle discontinue certain Exadata performance claims

I Received the following press release in my inbox today from the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommending that Oracle stop making certain performance claims about Exadata after a complaint from IBM.

In case you are not familiar with ExaData, it is a database machine or storage appliance that only supports Oracle database systems (learn more here). Oracle having bought Sun microsystems a few years back moved from being a software vendor that competed with other vendors software solutions including those from IBM while running on hardware from Dell, HP and IBM among others. Now that Oracle is in the hardware business, while you will still find Oracle software products running on their competitors hardware (servers and storage), Oracle is also more aggressively competing with those same partners, particularly IBM.

Hmm, to quote Scooby Doo: Rut Roh!

Looks like IBM complained to the Better Business Bureau (BBB) National Advertising Division (NAD) that resulted in the Advertising Self-Regulatory Council (ASRC) making their recommendation below (more about NAD and ASRC can be found here). Based on a billboard sign that I saw while riding from JFK airport into New York City last week, I would not be surprised if a company with two initials that start with an H and end with a P were to file a similar complaint.

I Wonder if the large wall size Oracle advertisement that used to be in the entry way to the white plains (IATA:HPN) airport (e.g. in IBM’s backyard) welcoming you to the terminal as you get off the airplanes is still there?

The following is the press release that I received:

For Immediate Release
Contact: Linda Bean
212.705.0129

NAD Finds Oracle Took Necessary Action in Discontinuing Comparative Performance Claims for Exadata; Oracle to Appeal NAD Decision

New York, NY – July 24, 2012 –TheNational Advertising Division has recommended that Oracle Corporation discontinue certain comparative product-performance claims for the company’s Exadata database machines, following a challenge by International Business Machines Corporation. Oracle said it would voluntarily discontinue the challenged claims, but noted that it would appeal NADs decision to the National Advertising Review Board.

The advertising claims at issue appeared in a full-page advertisement in the Wall Street Journal and included the following:

“Exadata 20x Faster … Replaces IBM Again”
“Giant European Retailer Moves Databases from IBM Power to Exadata … Runs 20 Times Faster”

NAD also considered whether the advertising implied that all Oracle Exadata systems are twenty times faster than all IBM Power systems.

The advertisement featured the image of an Oracle Exadata system, along with the statement: “Giant European Retailer Moves Databases from IBM Power to Exadata Runs 20 Times Faster.” The advertisement also offered a link to the Oracle website: “For more details oracle.com/EuroRetailer.”

IBM argued that the “20x Faster” claim makes overly broad references to “Exadata” and “IBM Power,” resulting in a misleading claim, which the advertiser’s evidence does not support. In particular, the challenger argued that by referring to the brand name “IBM Power” without qualification, Oracle was making a broad claim about the entire IBM Power systems line of products.

The advertiser, on the other hand, argued that the advertisement represented a case study, not a line claim, and noted that the sophisticated target audience would understand that the advertisement is based on the experience of one customer – the “Giant European Retailer” referenced in the advertisement.

In a 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 experienced judgment to determine what implied messages, if any, are conveyed by an advertisement. When evaluating the message communicated by an advertising claim, NAD will examine the claims at issue in the context of the entire advertisement in which they appear.

In this case, NAD concluded that while the advertiser may have intended to convey the message that in one case study a particular Exadata system was up to 20 times faster when performing two particular functions than a particular IBM Power system, Oracle’s general references to “Exadata” and “IBM Power,” along with the bold unqualified headline “Exadata 20x Faster Replaces IBM Again,” conveyed a much broader message.

NAD determined that at least one reasonable interpretation of the challenged advertisement is that all – or a vast majority – of Exadata systems consistently perform 20 times faster in all or many respects than all – or a vast majority – of IBM Power systems. NAD found that the message was not supported by the evidence in the record, which consisted of one particular comparison of one consumer’s specific IBM Power system to a specific Exadata System.

NAD further determined that the disclosure provided on the advertiser’s website was not sufficient to limit the broad message conveyed by the “20x Faster” claim. More importantly, NAD noted that even if Oracle’s website disclosure was acceptable – and had appeared clearly and conspicuously in the challenged advertisement – it would still be insufficient because an advertiser cannot use a disclosure to cure an otherwise false claim.

NAD noted that Oracle’s decision to permanently discontinue the claims at issue was necessary and proper.

Oracle, in its advertiser’s statement, said it was “disappointed with the NAD’s decision in this matter, which it believes is unduly broad and will severely limit the ability to run truthful comparative advertising, not only for Oracle but for others in the commercial hardware and software industry.”

Oracle noted that it would appeal all of NAD’s findings in the matter.

###

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 l 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

Ok, Oracle is no stranger to benchmark and performance claims controversy having amassed several decades of experience. Anybody remember the silver bullet database test from late 80s early 90s when Oracle set a record performance except that they never committed the writes to disk?

Something tells me that Oracle and Uncle Larry (e.g. Larry Ellison who is not really my uncle) will treat this as any kind of press or media coverage is good and probably will issue something like IBM must be worried if they have to go to the BBB.

Will a complaint which I’m sure is not the fist to be lodged with the BBB against Oracle deter customers, or be of more use to IBM sales and their partners in deals vs. Oracle?

What’s your take?

Is this much ado about nothing, a filler for a slow news or discussion day, a break from talking about VMware acquisition of Nicira or VMware CEO management changes? Perhaps this is an alternative to talking about the CEO of SSD vendor STEC being charged with insider trading, or something other than Larry Ellison buying an Hawaiian island (IMHO he could have gotten a better deal buying Greece), or is this something that Oracle will need to take seriously?

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

July 23, 2012April 18, 2022

SSD and Green IT moving beyond green washing

Keeping in mind that there is no such thing as a data or information recession, not to mention that people and data are living longer, there is the need to discuss expanding data footprints. When researching his new article over on SearchSolidstateStorage.com John Hilliard reached out to ask about SSD, Green IT, energy efficiency and effectiveness trends and perspectives (you can read the article and my comments here).

In the past when Green IT and Green storage was mentioned, discussions focused around energy avoidance along with space capacity reduction. While storage efficiency and optimization in the context of space-saving and capacity consolidation are part of Green storage, so too are storage IO consolidation with SSD. For inactive or less frequently accessed data, storage optimization and efficiency can focus on using various data footprint reduction techniques including archive, backup and data protection modernization, compression, dedupe, data management and deletion, along with storage tiering and thin provisioning among others.

On the other hand, for active data where performance is important, the focus expands to how to be more effective and boosting productivity with IO consolidation using SSD and other technologies.

Note that if your data center infrastructure is not efficient, then it is possible that for every watt of energy consumed, a watt (or more) of energy is needed to cool. However if your data center cooling is effective with a resulting low or good PUE, you may not be seeing a 1:1 watt or energy used for storage to cooling ratio as was more common a few years ago.

IMHO while reducing carbon footprints is a noble and good thing, however if that is your own focus or value proposition for a solution such as SSD or other Green technologies and techniques including data footprint reduction, you are missing many opportunities.

Have a read of John’s article that includes some of my comments on energy efficiency and effectiveness to support enhanced productivity, or the other aspect of Green IT being economic enabling to avoid missed opportunities.

Where to learn more

Various IT industry vendor and service provider links
Green and Virtual Data Center Primer
Green and Virtual Data Center links
Green IT Confusion Continues, Opportunities Missed!
Green IT deferral blamed on economic recession might be result of green gap
Supporting IT growth demand during economic uncertain times
Industry trend: People plus data are aging and living longer
Are large storage arrays dead at the hands of SSD?
EPA Energy Star for data center storage draft 3 specification
How much SSD do you need vs. want?
More storage and IO metrics that matter
What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do

Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage

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

July 12, 2012April 18, 2022

Give HP storage some love and short strokin

Following up from my last post over at InfoStor about metrics that matter, here is a link to a new piece that I did on storage vendors benchmarking and related topics. This new post looked at an storage performance council (SPC1) benchmark that HP did with their P10000 (e.g. 3PAR) storage system under assertions by some in the industry that they were short stroking to meet better performance.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

I’m surprised some creative technical marketer, blogger or prankster has yet to rework Clarence Carters (e.g. Dr. CC) iconic song into something about storage performance and capacity short strokin.

Ok, nuff said before I get a visit from the HP truth squads, in the meantime, give HP a hug and some love if so inclined.

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

July 3, 2012January 1, 2021

Dell is buying Quest software, not the phone company Qwest

For those not familiar with Quest, they are a software company not to be confused with the telephone communications company formerly known as Qwest (aka now known as centurylink).

Both Dell and Quest have been on software related acquisition initiatives that past few years with Quest having purchased vKernel, Vizoncore (vRanger virtualization backup), BakBone (who had acquire Alavarii and Asempra) for traditional backup and data protection among others. Not to be out done, as well as purchasing Quest, Dell has also more recently bought Appassure (Disclosure: StorageIOblog site sponsor) for data protection, Sonicwall and Wyse in addition to some other recent purchases (ASAP, Boomi, Compellent, Exanet, EqualLogic, Force10, InsightOne, KACE, Ocarina, Perot, RNA and Scalent among others).

What does this mean?
Dell is expanding the scope of their business with more products (hardware, software), solution bundles, services and channel partnering opportunities Some of the software tools and focus areas that Quest brings to the Dell table or portfolio include:

Database management (Oracle, SQLserver)
Data protection (virtual and physical backup, replication, bc, dr)
Performance monitoring (DCIM and IRM) of applications and infrastructure
User workspace management (application delivery)
Windows server management (migrate and manage, AD, exchange, sharepoint)
Identify and access management (security, compliance, privacy)

What does Dell get by spending over $2B USD on quest?

Additional software titles or product

More software developers for their Software group

Sales people to help promote, partner and sell software solutions

Create demand pull for other Dell products and services via software

Increase its partner reach via existing Quest VARs and business partners

Extend the size of the Dell software and intellectual property (IP) portfolio

New revenue streams that compliment existing products and lines of business

Potential for better rate of return on some of its $12B USD in cash or equivalence

Is this a good move for Dell?
Yes for the above reasons

Is there a warning to this for Dell?
Yes, they need to execute, keep the Quest team focused along with their other teams on the respective partners, products and market opportunities while expanding into new areas. Dell needs to also leverage Quest to further its cause in creating trust, confidence and strategic relationships with channel partners to reach new markets in different geographies. In addition, Dell needs to articulate its strategy and positioning of the various solutions to avoid products being perceived as competing vs. complimenting each other.

Additional Dell related links:
Dell Storage Customer Advisory Panel (CAP)
Dell Storage Forum 2011 revisited
Dude, is Dell doing a disk deal again with Compellent?
Data footprint reduction (Part 2): Dell, IBM, Ocarina and Storwize
Post Holiday IT Shopping Bargains, Dell Buying Exanet?
Dell Will Buy Someone, However Not Brocade (At least for now)

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

July 1, 2012December 24, 2020

EPA Energy Star for data center storage draft 3 specification

The U.S. EPA is ready to release DRAFT 3 of the Energy Star for data center storage specification and has an upcoming web session that you can sign up for if are not on their contact list of interested stake holders. If you are not familiar with the EPA Energy star for data center storage program, here is some background information.

Thus if you are interested, see the email and information below, signup and take part if so inclined as opposed to saying that you did not have a chance to comment.

Dear ENERGY STAR® Data Center Storage Manufacturer or Other Interested Party:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would like to announce the release of the Draft 3 Version 1.0 ENERGY STAR Specification for Data Center Storage. The draft is attached and is accompanied by a cover letter and Draft Test Method. Stakeholders are invited to review these documents and submit comments to EPA via email to storage@energystar.gov by Friday, July 27, 2012.

EPA will host a webinar on Wednesday, July 11, 2012, tentatively starting at 1:00PM EST. The agenda will be focused on elements from Draft 3, Product Families, and other key topics. Please RSVP to storage@energystar.gov no later than Tuesday, July 3, 2012 with the subject "RSVP – Storage Draft 3 specification meeting."

If you have any questions, please contact Robert Meyers, EPA, at Meyers.Robert@epa.gov or (202) 343-9923; or John Clinger, ICF International, at John.Clinger@icfi.com or (202) 572-9432.

Thank you for your continued support of the ENERGY STAR program.

For more information, visit: www.energystar.gov

This message was sent to you on behalf of ENERGY STAR. Each ENERGY STAR partner organization must have at least one primary contact receiving e-mail to maintain partnership. If you are no longer working on ENERGY STAR, and wish to be removed as a contact, please update your contact status in your MESA account. If you are not a partner organization and wish to opt out of receiving e-mails, you may call the ENERGY STAR Hotline at 1-888-782-7937 and request to have your mass mail settings changed. Unsubscribing means that you will no longer receive program-wide or product-specific e-mails from ENERGY STAR.

Ok, you have been advised, 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

June 7, 2012November 26, 2023

NetApp on rough ground, or a diamond in the rough?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

In case you missed it, NetApp announced their most recent quarterly earnings a few weeks ago which in themselves were not bad. However what some of their competition jumping up and down for joy while others are scratching their heads is the forward-looking guidance given by NetApp.

NetApp can be seen as being on rough ground given their forward-looking guidance over the next year which could be seen as either very conservative, or an admission that they are not growing as fast as some of their competitors are challenging them.

Reading between the lines, looking at various financial and other resources in addition to factoring in technology items, there is more to NetApp then meets the eye and current stock price or product portfolio.

For example, NetApp is sitting on over $4 Billion USD cash that they could use for an acquisition, buying back stock, launching a major sales and marketing initiative to expand into new or adjacent markets or other activities. Speaking of acquisitions, NetApp has done some in the past including Spinnaker, which is now integrated with Ontap (e.g. clustering), Topio, Decru (security encryption) and Onaro (DCIM and IRM management software tools). More recently, NetApp has acquired Bycast (archiving and policy storage management software), Akorri (capacity management and DCIM and IRM software) and Engenio. NetApp is also maintaining good margins via both direct, channel and OEM activities while launching new products such as the channel and SMB focused FAS 2220.

Its arguable depending upon your point of view (or who you for or are a fan of) if NetApp has all the right product pieces now, in the works, or on their radar for acquisitions. Assuming that NetApp has the pieces, they also need to move beyond selling simply what is on the truck or what is safe and comfortable or perhaps easy to sell. This is not to say that NetApp is not being effective in selling what they have and pushing the envelope, however keeping in mind who their main competitor is, the old sales saying of being able to sell ice to an Eskimo comes to mind.

In the case of NetApp, when the competition makes an issue about scalibility or performance of their flagship storage systems FAS and Ontap storage software, change the playing field leveraging all the tools in their portfolio. NetApp like EMC before them is figuring out how to sell via different channels or venues their complete portfolio with a mix of direct, channel and OEM. After all, it seems like only yesterday that EMC was trying to figure out where and when to sell CLARiiON (e.g. now VNX) as opposed to avoiding competing with the Symmetrix (aka now the VMAX) not to mention expanding from a direct to channel and OEM model. Perhaps NetApp can continue to figure out how to leverage more effectively the Engenio E series for big bandwidth beyond their current OEMs. NetApp can also leverage their existing partners who have embraced Bycast (aka StorageGrid) while finding new ones.

The reality is that NetApp is being challenged by EMC who is moving down market into some of NetApp’s traditional accounts along with in the scale-out NAS and big data sectors. This is where NetApp can leverage their technical capabilities including people combined with some effective sales and marketing execution to change the playing field vs. responding to EMC and others.

NetApp has many of the pieces, parts, products, people, programs and partners so now how can they leverage those to expand both their revenues, as well as support margin to grow the business, unless they are looking to be acquired.

I still subscribe that NetApp and EMC are two similar companies on parallel tracks offset by time, by about a decade or decade and a half.

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

Thus, IMHO NetApp is a diamond in the rough, granted I am guessing EMC and some others do not see it that way. However, there was a time when EMC was seen as a diamond in the rough while others discounted that notion, particularly an Itty Bitty Manufacturing company from New York who is now focusing on services among other things.

Keep in mind however, diamonds can also be lost or taken as well as there can be fake gems.

Here are some related links:
Unified storage systems showdown: NetApp FAS vs. EMC VNX
Two companies on parallel tracks moving like trains offset by time: EMC and NetApp
NetApp buying LSI’s Engenio Storage Business Unit

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

June 6, 2012March 11, 2022

Green IT deferral blamed on economic recession might be result of green gap

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

I recently saw a comment somewhere that talked about Green IT being deferred or set aside due to lack of funding because of ongoing global economic turmoil. For those who see Green IT in the context of the green washing efforts that requiring spending to gain some benefits that I can understand. After all, if your goal is to simply go and be or be seen as being green, there is a cost to doing that.

With tight or shrinking IT budgets, there are other realities and while organizations may want to do the right thing helping the environment, however that is often seen as overhead to financial conscious management.

On the other hand, turn the green washing messaging off or at least dial-it back a bit as has been the case the past couple of years.

Expand the Green IT discussion or change it around a bit from that of being seen or perceived as being green by energy efficiency or avoidance to that of effectiveness, enhanced productivity, doing more with what you have or with less and there is a different opportunity.

That opportunity is to meet the financial and business goals or requirements that as a by-product help the environment. In other words, expand the focus of Green IT to that of economics and improving on resource effectiveness and the environment gets a free ride, or, Green gets self-funded.

The challenge is what I refer to as the Green Gap, which is the disconnect between what is talked about (e.g. messaging) and thus perceived to be Green IT and where common IT opportunities exist (or missed opportunities have occurred).

Green IT or at least the tenants of driving efficiency and effectiveness to use energy more effectively, address recycling and waste, removable of hazardous substance and other items continues to thrive. However, the green washing is subsiding and overtime organizations will not be as dismissive of Green IT in the context of improving productivity, reducing complexity and costs, optimization and related themes tied to economics where the environment gets a free ride.

Here are some related links:
Closing the Green Gap
Energy efficient technology sales depend on the pitch
EPA Energy Star for Data Center Storage Update
Green IT Confusion Continues, Opportunities Missed!
How to reduce your Data Footprint impact (Podcast)
Optimizing storage capacity and performance to reduce your data footprint
Performance metrics: Evaluating your data storage efficiency
PUE, Are you Managing Power, Energy or Productivity?
Saving Money with Green Data Storage Technology
Saving Money with Green IT: Time To Invest In Information Factories
Shifting from energy avoidance to energy efficiency
Storage Efficiency and Optimization: The Other Green
Supporting IT growth demand during economic uncertain times
The new Green IT: Efficient, Effective, Smart and Productive
The other Green Storage: Efficiency and Optimization
The Green and Virtual Data Center Book (CRC Press, Intel Recommended Reading)

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

June 4, 2012January 23, 2019

Why FC and FCoE vendors get beat up over bandwidth?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

Have you noticed how Fibre Channel (FC) and FC over Ethernet (FCoE) switch and adapter vendors and their followers focus around bandwidth vs. response time, latency or other performance activity? For example, 8Gb FC (e.g. 8GFC), or 10Gb as opposed to latency and response time, or IOPS and other activity indicators.

When you look at your own environment, or that of a customers or prospects or hear of a conversation involving storage networks, is the focus on bandwidth, or lack of it, or perhaps throughput being a non-issue? For example, a customer says why go to 16GFC when they are barely using 8Gb with their current FC environment.

This is not a new phenomenon and is something I saw when working for a storage-networking vendor who had SAN, MAN and WAN solutions (E.g. INRANGE). Those with networking backgrounds tended to focus on bandwidth when discussing storage networks while those with storage, server or applications background also look at latency or IO completion time (response time), queuing, message size, IOPs or frames and packets per second. Thus there are different storage and networking metrics that matter that are also discussed further in my first book Resilient Storage Networks: Designing Flexible Scalable Data Infrastructures.

When I hear a storage networking vendor talk about their latest 16GFC based product I like to ask them what is the biggest benefit vs. 8GFC and not surprisingly, the usual response is like twice the bandwidth. When I ask them about what that means in terms of more IOPS in a given amount of time, or reduced IO completion time, lower latency, sometimes I often get the response along the lines of Yeah, that too, however it has twice the bandwidth.

Ok, I get it, yes, bandwidth is important for some applications, however so too are activity measured in IOPS, transactions, packets, frames, pages, sequences and exchanges among other units of measure along with response time and latency (e.g. different storage and networking metrics that matter).

What many storage networking vendors actually get, however they don’t talk about it for various reasons, perhaps because they are not be asked about it, or engaged in the conversation is that there is an improvement in response time in going from such as 8GFC to 16GFC. Likewise, there can be improvements in response time in addition to the more commonly discussed bandwidth.

If you are a storage networking switch, adapter or other component vendor, var or channel partner expand your conversation to include activity and response time as part of your value proposition. Likewise, if you are a customer, ask your technology providers to expand on the conversation of how new technologies help in areas other than bandwidth.

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

June 4, 2012December 24, 2020

How much SSD do you need vs. want?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

I have been getting asked by IT customers, VAR’s and even vendors how much solid state device (SSD) storage is needed or should be installed to address IO performance needs to which my standard answer is it depends.

I also am also being asked if there is rule of thumb (RUT) of how much SSD you should have either in terms of the number of devices or a percentage; IMHO, the answer is it depends. Sure, there are different RUTs floating around based on different environments, applications, workloads however are they applicable to your needs.

What I would recommend is instead of focusing on percentages, RUTs, or other SWAG estimate’s or PIROMA calculations, look at your current environment and decide where the activity or issues are. If you know how many fast hard disk drives (HDD) are needed to get to a certain performance level and amount of used capacity that is a good starting point.

If you do not have that information, use tools from your server, storage or third-party provider to gain insight into your activity to help size SSD. Also if you have a database environment and are not familiar with the tools, talk with your DBA’s to have them run some reports that show performance information the two of you can discuss to zero in hot spots or opportunity for SSD.

Keep in mind when looking at SSD what is that you are trying to address by installing SSD. For example, is there a specific or known performance bottleneck resulting in poor response time or latency or is there a general problem or perceived opportunity?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

Is there a lack of bandwidth for large data transfers or is there a constraint on how many IO operations per second (e.g. IOPS) or transaction or activity that can be done in a given amount of time. In other words the more you know where or what the bottleneck is including if you can trace it back to a single file, object, database, database table or other item the closer you are to answering how much SSD you will need.

As an example if using third-party tools or those provided by SSD vendors or via other sources you decide that your IO bottleneck are database transaction logs and system paging files, then having enough SSD space capacity to fit those in part of the solution. However, what happens when you remove the first set of bottlenecks, what new ones will appear and will you have enough space capacity on your SSD to accommodate the next in line hot spot?

Keep in mind that you may want more SSD however what can you get budget approval to buy now without having more proof and a business case. Get some extra SSD space capacity to use for what you are confident can address other bottlenecks, or, enable new capabilities.

On other hand if you can only afford enough SSD to get started, make sure you also protect it. If you decide that two SSD devices (PCIe cache or target cards, drives or appliances) will take care of your performance and capacity needs, make sure to keep availability in mind. This means having extra SSD devices for RAID 1 mirroring, replication or other form of data protection and availability. Keep in mind that while traditional hard disk drive (HDD) storage is often gauged on cost per capacity, or dollar per GByte or dollar per TByte, with SSD measure its value on cost to performance. For example, how many IOPS, or response time improvement or bandwidth are obtained to meet your specific needs per dollar spent.

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

May 20, 2012November 26, 2023

Spring (May) 2012 StorageIO news letter

Spring (May) 2012 News letter

Welcome to the Spring (May) 2012 edition of the Server and StorageIO Group (StorageIO) news letter. This follows the Fall (December) 2011 edition.

You can get access to this news letter via various social media venues (some are shown below) in addition to StorageIO web sites and subscriptions.

Click on the following links to view the Spring May 2012 edition as an HTML or PDF or, to go to the news letter page to view previous editions.

You can subscribe to the news letter by clicking here.

Enjoy this edition of the StorageIO newsletter, let me know your comments and feedback.

Nuff said for now

Cheers
Gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press) and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier)
twitter @storageio

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

SSD and Green IT moving beyond green washing

Where to learn more

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: