Tag: IBM

Posted on

EMC VMAX 10K, looks like high-end storage systems are still alive

StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

This is the first in a multi-part series of posts looking at if large enterprise and legacy storage systems are dead, along with what todays EMC VMAX 10K updates means.

EMC has announced an upgrade, refresh or new version of their previously announced Virtual matrix (VMAX) 10,000 (10K), part of the VMAX family of enterprise class storage systems formerly known as DMX (Direct Matrix) and Symmetrix. I will get back to more coverage on the VMAX 10K and other EMC enhancements in a few moments in part two and three of this series.

Have you heard the industry myth about the demise or outright death of traditional storage systems? This has been particularly the case for high-end enterprise class systems, which by the way which were first, declared dead back in the mid-1990s then at the hands of emerging mid-range storage systems.

Enterprise class storage systems include EMC VMAX, Fujitsu Eternus DX8700, HDS, HP XP P9000 based on the HDS high-end product (OEM from HDS parent Hitachi Ltd.). Note that some HPers or their fans might argue that the P10000 (formerly known as 3PAR) declared as tier 1.5 should also be on the list; I will leave that up to you to decide.

Let us not forget the IBM DS8000 series (whose predecessors was known as the ESS and VSS before that); although some IBMers will tell you that XIV should also be in this list. High-end enterprise class storage systems such as those mentioned above are not alone in being declared dead at the hands of new all solid-state devices (SSD) and their startup vendors, or mixed and hybrid-based solutions.

Some are even declaring dead due to new SSD appliances or systems, and by storage hypervisor or virtual storage array (VSA) the traditional mid-range storage systems that were supposed to have killed off the enterprise systems a decade ago (hmm, DejaVu?).

The mid-range storage systems include among others block (SAN and DAS) and file (NAS) systems from Data Direct Networks (DDN), Dell Complement, EqualLogic and MD series (Netapp Engenio based), EMC VNX and Isilon, Fujitsu Eternus, and HDS HUS mid-range formerly known as AMS. Let us not forget about HP 3PAR or P2000 (DotHill based) or P6000 (EVA which is probably being put out to rest). Then there are the various IBM products (their own and what they OEM from others), NEC, NetApp (FAS and Engenio), Oracle and Starboard (formerly known as Reldata). Note that there are many startups that could be in the above list as well if they were not considering the above to be considered dead, thus causing themselves to also be extinct as well, how ironic ;).

What are some industry trends that I am seeing?

  • Some vendors and products might be nearing the ends of their useful lives
  • Some vendors, their products and portfolios continue to evolve and expand
  • Some vendors and their products are moving into new or adjacent markets
  • Some vendors are refining where and what to sell when and to who
  • Some vendors are moving up market, some down market
  • Some vendors are moving into new markets, others are moving out of markets
  • Some vendors are declaring others dead to create a new market for their products
  • One size or approach or technology does not fit all needs, avoid treating all the same
  • Leverage multiple tools and technology in creative ways
  • Maximize return on innovation (the new ROI) by using various tools, technologies in ways to boost productivity, effectiveness while removing complexity and cost
  • Realization that cutting cost can result in reduced resiliency, thus look for and remove complexity with benefit of removing costs without compromise
  • Storage arrays are moving into new roles, including as back-end storage for cloud, object and other software stacks running on commodity servers to replace JBOD (DejaVu anyone?).

Keep in mind that there is a difference between industry adoption (what is talked about) and customer deployment (what are actually bought and used). Likewise there is technology based on GQ (looks and image) and G2 (functionality, experience).

There is also an industry myth that SSD cannot or has not been successful in traditional storage systems which in some cases has been true with some products or vendors. Otoh, some vendors such as EMC, NetApp and Oracle (among others) are having good success with SSD in their storage systems. Some SSD startup vendors have been more successful on both the G2 and GQ front, while some focus on the GQ or image may not be as successful (or at least yet) in the industry adoption vs. customer deployment game.

For the above mentioned storage systems vendors and products (among others), or at least for most of them there is still have plenty of life in them, granted their role and usage is changing including in some cases being found as back-end storage systems behind servers running virtualization, cloud, object storage and other storage software stacks. Likewise, some of the new and emerging storage systems (hardware, software, valueware, services) and vendors have bright futures while others may end up on the where are they now list.

Are high-end enterprise class or other storage arrays and systems dead at the hands of new startups, virtual storage appliances (VSA), storage hypervisors, storage virtualization, virtual storage and SSD?

Are large storage arrays dead at the hands of SSD?

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

 

Here are links to two polls where you can cast your vote.

Cast your vote and see results of if large storage arrays and systems are dead here.

Cast your vote and see results of if SSD has not been successful in storage systems.

So what about it, are enterprise or large storage arrays and systems dead?

Perhaps in some tabloids or industry myths (or that some wish for) or in some customer environments, as well as for some vendors or their products that can be the case.

However, IMHO for many other environments (and vendors) the answer is no, granted some will continue to evolve from legacy high-end enterprise class storage systems to mid-range or to appliance or VSA or something else.

There is still life many of the storage systems architectures, platforms and products that have been declared dead for over a decade.

Continue reading about the specifics of the EMC VMAX 10K announcement in the next post in this series here. Also check out Chucks EMC blog to see what he has to say.

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

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO LLC All Rights Reserved

Posted on

Many faces of storage hypervisor, virtual storage or storage virtualization

StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

Storage hypervisors were a 2012 popular buzzword bingo topic with plenty of industry adoption and some customer deployment. Separating the hype around storage hypervisors reveals conversations around backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving
Cloud and virtualization components

Storage virtualization along with virtual storage and storage hypervisors have a theme of abstracting underlying physical hardware resources like server virtualization. The abstraction can be for consolidation and aggregation, or for enabling agility, flexibility, emulation and other functionality.

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Storage virtualization can be implemented in different locations, in many ways with various functionality and focus. For example the abstraction can occur on a server, in an virtual or physical appliance (e.g. tin wrapped software), in a network switch or router, as well as in a storage system. The focus can be for aggregation, or data protection (HA, BC, DR, backup, replication, snapshot) on a homogeneous (all one vendor) or mixed vendor basis (heterogeneous).

backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

Here is a link to a guest post that I recently did over at The Virtualization Practice looking at storage hypervisors, virtual storage and storage virtualization. As is the case with virtual storage, storage virtualization, storage for virtual environments, depending on your views, spheres of influence, preferences among other factors what you call a storage hypervisor will probably vary.

Additional related material:

  • Are you using or considering implementation of a storage hypervisor?
  • Cloud, virtualization, storage and networking in an election year
  • EMC VPLEX: Virtual Storage Redefined or Respun?
  • Server and Storage Virtualization – Life beyond Consolidation
  • Should Everything Be Virtualized?
  • How many degrees separate you and your information?
  • Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC)
  • The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC)
  • Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier)
  • backup, restore, BC, DR and archiving

    • Btw, as a special offer for viewers, I have some copies of Resilient Storage Networking: Designing Flexible Scalable Data Infrastructures (Elsevier) available for $19.95, shipping and handling included. Send me an email or tweet (@storageio) to learn more and get your copy (Major credit cards and Pay pal accepted).

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO LLC All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    SSD, flash and DRAM, DejaVu or something new?

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    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 transtationImage 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 UtrechtImage 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.

    image of ssd technology evolution

    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.

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    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.

    Where SSD can be used and options

    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.

    SSD, IO, memory and storage hirearchy

    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?

    Image of Oracle ExaData storage system

    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.

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    IBM vs. Oracle, NAD intervenes, again

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    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).

    Oracle 10 million dollar challenge ad image

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    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.

    SSD, IO, memory and storage hirearchy

    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.

    Where SSD can be used and options

    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.

    SSD, DRAM, PCM and storage adoption timeline

    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.

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    Cloud, virtualization, storage and networking in an election year

    My how time flies, seems like just yesterday (back in 2008) that I did a piece titled Politics and Storage, or, storage in an election year V2.008 and if you are not aware, it is 2012 and thus an election year in the U.S. as well as in many other parts of the world. Being an election year it’s not just about politicians, their supporters, pundits, surrogates, donors and voters, it’s also a technology decision-making and acquisition year (as are most years) for many environments.

    Similar to politics, some technology decisions will be major while others will be minor or renewals so to speak. Major decisions will evolve around strategies, architectures, visions, implementation plans and technology selections including products, protocols, processes, people, vendors or suppliers and services for traditional, virtual and cloud data infrastructure environments.

    Vendors, suppliers, service providers and their associated industry forums or alliances and trade groups are in various sales and marketing awareness campaigns. These various campaigns will decide who will be chosen by their customers or prospects for technology acquisitions ranging from hardware, software and services including servers, storage, IO and networking, desktops, power, cooling, facilities, management tools, virtualization and cloud products and services along with related items.

    The politics of data infrastructures including servers, storage, networking, hardware, software and services spanning physical, cloud and virtual environments has similarities to other political races. These include many organizations in the form of inter departmental rivalry over budgets or funding, service levels, decision-making, turf wars and technology ownership not to mention the usual vendor vs. vendor, VAR vs. VAR, service provider vs. service provider or other match ups.

    On the other hand, data and storage are also being used to support political campaigns in many ways across physical, virtual and cloud deployment scenarios.

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    Let us not forget about the conventions or what are more commonly known as shows, conferences, user group events in the IT world. For example EMCworld earlier this year, Dell Storage Forum, or the recent VMworld (or click here to view video from past VMworld party with INXS), Oracle Open World along with many vendor analyst, partner, press and media or blogger days.

    Here are some 2012 politics of data infrastructure and storage campaign match-ups:

    Speaking of networks vs. server and storage or software and convergence, how about Brocade vs. Cisco, Qlogic vs. Emulex, Broadcom vs. Mellanox, Juniper vs. HP and Dell (Force10) or Arista vs. others in the race for SAN LAN MAN WAN POTS and PANs.

    Then there are the claims, counter claims, pundits, media, bloggers, trade groups or lobbyist, marketing alliance or pacs, paid for ads and posts, tweets and videos along with supporting metrics for traditional and social media.

    Lets also not forget about polls, and more polls.

    Certainly, there are vendors vs. vendors relying on their campaign teams (sales, marketing, engineering, financing and external surrogates) similar to what you would find with a politician, of course scope, size and complexity would vary.

    Surrogates include analyst, bloggers, consultants, business partners, community organizers, editors, VARs, influencers, press, public relations and publications among others. Some claim to be objective and free of vendor influence while leveraging simple to complex schemes for renumeration (e.g. getting paid) while others simply state what they are doing and with whom.

    Likewise, some point fingers at others who are misbehaving while deflecting away from what they are actually doing. Hmm, sounds like the pundit or surrogate two-step (as opposed to the Potomac two step) and prompts the question of who is checking the fact checkers and making disclosures (disclosure: this piece is being sponsored by StorageIO ;) )?

    StorageIO industry trends cloud, virtualization and big data

    What this all means?

    Use your brain, use your eyes and ears, and use your nose all of which have dual paths to your senses.

    In other words, if something sounds or looks too good to be true, it probably isn’t.

    Likewise if something smells funny or does not feel right to your senses or common sense, it probably is not or at least requires a closer look or analysis.

    Be an informed decision maker balancing needs vs. wants to make effective selections regardless of if for a major or minor item, technology, trend, product, process, protocol or service. Informed decisions also mean looking at both current and evolving or future trends, challenges and needs which for data infrastructures including servers, storage, networking, IO fabrics, cloud and virtualization means factoring in changing data and information life cycles and access or usage patterns. After all, while there are tough economic times on a global basis, there is no such thing as a data or information recession.

    StorageIO and uncle sam want you for cloud virtualization and data storage networking

    This also means gaining insight and awareness of issues and challenges, plus balancing awareness and knowledge (G2) vs. looks, appearances and campaign sales pitches (GQ) for your particular environment, priorities and preferences.

    Keep in mind and in the spirit of legendary Chicago style voting, when it comes to storage and data infrastructure topics, technologies and decisions, spend early, spend often and spend for those who cannot to keep the vendors and their ecosystem of partners happy.

    Note that this post is neither supported, influenced, endorsed or paid for by any vendors, VARs, service providers, trade groups, political action committees or Picture Archive Communication system (e.g. PACs), both of which deal with and in big data along with industry consortiums, their partners, customers or surrogates and neither would they probably approve of it anyway’s.

    With that being said, I am Greg Schulz of StorageIO and am not running for or from anything this year and I do endorse the above post ;).

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    Who will be winner with Oracle $10 Million dollar challenge?

    Oracle 10 million dollar challenge ad image

    In case you missed it, Oracle has a ten million dollar challenge (here, here and here) to prove that their servers and database software technologies are 5 times faster than IBM.

    Up to 10 winners open to U.S. Fortune 1000 companies running an Oracle 11g data warehouse on IBM Power system. Offer expires August 31, 2012 with configuration terms. See this URL for official rules: https://oracle.com/IBMchallenge

    Click here to view entry form or click on form below.

    Oracle 10 million dollar challenge entry form image

    Taking a step back for a moment, if you forgot or had not heard, Oracle earlier this summer had their hands slapped by the US Better Business Bureau (BBB) National Advertising Directive (NAD) over performance claims and ads. IBM complained to the BBB that unfair marketing claims about their servers and database products were being made by Oracle (read more here).

    Not one to miss a beat or bit or byte of data, not to mention dollars, Oracle has run ads in newspapers and other venues for the Oracle IBM challenge with the winner receiving $10,000,000.00 USD (details here).

    Oracle exadata servers image

    This begs the question, who wins, the company or entity that actually can standup and meet the challenge? How about Oracle, do they win if enough people see, hear, talk (or complain) about the ads and challenges? What about the cost, how will Oracle cover that or is it simply a drop in the bucket of an even larger amount of dollars potentially valued in the billions of dollars (e.g. servers, storage, software, services)?

    Now for some fun, using an inflation calculator with 1974 dollars as that is when the TV show the six million dollar man made its debut. If you do not know, that is a TV show where an injured government employee (Steve Austin) played by actor Lee Majors was rebuilt using bionic in order to be faster and stronger with the then current technology (ok, TV technology). Using the inflation calculator, the 1974 six million dollar man and machine would cost about $27,882,839.76 in 2012 USD (364.7% increase).

    Now using todays what Oracle is calling faster, stronger machine and associated staff for $10,000,000 challenge prize award, would have cost $2,151,861.17 in 1974 dollars. Note that the equal amount of compute processing, storage performance and capacity, networking capability and software abilities in 1974 similar to what is available today would have cost even more than what the inflation calculator shows. For that, we would need to have something like a technology inflation (or improvement) calculator.

    Learn more about the Oracle challenge here, here and here, as well as the NAD announcement here, and the six million dollar man here

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    IBM buys flash solid state device (SSD) industry veteran TMS

    How much flash (or DRAM) based Solid State Device (SSD) do you want or need?

    IBM recently took a flash step announcing it wants and needs more SSD capabilities in different packaging and functionality capabilities to meet the demands and opportunities of customers, business partners and prospects by acquiring Texas Memory Systems (TMS).

    IBM buys SSD flash vendor TMS

    Unlike most of the current generation of SSD vendors besides those actually making the dies (chips or semiconductors) or SSD drives that are startups or relatively new, TMS is the industry veteran. Where most of the current SSD vendors experiences (as companies) is measured in months or at best years, TMS has seen several generations and SSD adoption cycles during its multi-decade existence.

    IBM buys SSD vendor Texas Memory Systems TMS

    What this means is that TMS has been around during past dynamic random access memory (DRAM) based SSD cycles or eras, as well as being an early adopter and player in the current nand flash SSD era or cycle.

    Granted, some in the industry do not consider the previous DRAM based generation of products as being SSD, and vice versa, some DRAM era SSD aficionados do not consider nand flash as being real SSD. Needless to say that there are many faces or facets to SSD ranging in media (DRAM, and nand flash among others) along with packaging for different use cases and functionality.

    IBM along with some other vendors recognize that the best type of IO is the one that you do not have to do. However reality is that some type of Input Output (IO) operations need to be done with computer systems. Hence the second best type of IO is the one that can be done with the least impact to applications in a cost-effective way to meet specific service level objectives (SLO) requirements. This includes leveraging main memory or DRAM as cache or buffers along with server-based PCIe SSD flash cards as cache or target devices, along with internal SSD drives, as well as external SSD drives and SSD drives and flash cards in traditional storage systems or appliances as well as purpose-built SSD storage systems.

    While TMS does not build the real nand flash single level cell (SLC) or multi-level cell (MLC) SSD drives (like those built by Intel, Micron, Samsung, SANdisk, Seagate, STEC and Western Digital (WD) among others), TMS does incorporate nand flash chips or components that are also used by others who also make nand flash PCIe cards and storage systems.

    StorageIO industry trend for storage IO

    IMHO this is a good move for both TMS and IBM, both of whom have been StorageIO clients in the past (here, here and here) that was a disclosure btw ;) as it gives TMS, their partners and customers a clear path and large organization able to invest in the technologies and solutions on a go forward basis. In other words, TMS who had looked to be bought gets certainty about their future as do they clients.

    IBM who has used SSD based components such as PCIe flash SSD cards and SSD based drives from various suppliers gets a PCIe SSD card of their own, along with purpose-built mature SSD storage systems that have lineages to both DRAM and nand flash-based experiences. Thus IBM controls some of their own SSD intellectual property (e.g. IP) for PCIe cards that can go in theory into their servers, as well as storage systems and appliances that use Intel based (e.g. xSeries from IBM) and IBM Power processor based servers as a platform such. For example DS8000 (Power processor), and Intel based XIV, SONAS, V7000, SVC, ProtecTier and Pursystems (some are Power based).

    In addition IBM also gets a field proven purpose-built all SSD storage system to compete with those from startups (Kaminario, Purestorage, Solidfire, Violin and Whiptail among others), as well as those being announced from competitors such as EMC (e.g. project X and project thunder) in addition to SSD drives that can go into servers and storage systems.

    The question should not be if SSD is in your future, rather where will you be using it, in the server or a storage system, as a cache or a target, as a PCIe target or cache card or as a drive or as a storage system. This also means the question of how much SSD do you need along with what type (flash or DRAM), for what applications and how configured among other topics.

    Storage and Memory Hirearchy diagram where SSD fits

    What this means is that there are many locations and places where SSD fits, one type of product or model does not fit or meet all requirements and thus IBM with their acquisition of TMS, along with presumed partnership with other SSD based components will be able to offer a diverse SSD portfolio.

    StorageIO industry trend for storage IO

    The industry trend is for vendors such as Cisco, Dell, EMC, IBM, HP, NetApp, Oracle and others all of whom are either physical server and storage vendors, or in the case of EMC, virtual servers partnered with Cisco (vBlock and VCE) and Lenovo for physical servers.

    Different types and locations for SSD

    Thus it only makes sense for those vendors to offer diverse SSD product and solution offerings to meet different customer and application needs vs. having a single solution that users adapt to. In other words, if all you have is a hammer, everything needs to look like a nail, however if you have a tool box of various technologies, then it comes down to being able to leverage including articulating what to use when, where, why and how for different situations.

    I think this is a good move for both IBM and TMS. Now lets watch how IBM and TMS can go beyond the press release, slide decks and webex briefings covering why it is a good move to justify their acquisition and plans, moving forward and to see the results of what is actually accomplished near and long-term.

    Read added industry trends and perspective commentary about IBM buying TMS here and here, as well as check out these related posts and content:

    How much SSD do you need vs. want?
    What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do
    Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
    Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) On Endangered Species List?
    Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
    EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
    SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments: Part I Spinning up to speed on SSD
    Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
    Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
    Part I: PureSystems, something old, something new, something from big blue
    The Many Faces of Solid State Devices/Disks (SSD)
    SSD and Green IT moving beyond green washing

    Meanwhile, congratulations to both IBM and TMS, 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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    What does new EMC and Lenovo partnership mean?

    EMC and EMCworld

    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.

    Lenovo Thinkpad
    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    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.

    Oracle Exadata

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    Are large storage arrays dead at the hands of SSD?

    Storage I/O trends

    An industry trends and perspective.

    .

    Are large storage arrays dead at the hands of SSD? Short answer NO not yet.
    There is still a place for traditional storage arrays or appliances particular those with extensive features, functionality and reliability availability serviceability (RAS). In other words, there is still a place for large (and small) storage arrays or appliances including those with SSDs.

    Is there a place for newer flash SSD storage systems, appliances and architectures? Yes
    Similar to how there is a place for traditional midrange storage arrays or appliances have found their roles vs. traditional higher end so-called enterprise arrays. Think as an example  EMC CLARiiON/VNX or HP EVA/P6000 or HDS AMS/HUS or NetApp FAS or IBM DS5000 or IBM V7000 among others vs. EMC Symmetrix/DMX/VMAX or HP P10000/3Par or HDS VSP/USP or IBM DS8000. In addition to traditional enterprise or high-end storage systems and midrange also known as modular, there are also specialized appliances or targets such as for backup/restore and archiving. Also do not forget the IO performance SSD appliances like those from TMS among others that have been around for a while.

    Is the role of large storage systems changing or evolving? Yes
    Given their scale and ability to do large amounts of work in a dense footprint, for some the role of these systems is still mission critical tier 1 application and data support. For other environments, their role continues to evolve being used for high-density tier 2 bulk or even near-line storage for on-line access at scale.

    Storage I/O trends

    Does this mean there is completion between the old and new systems? Yes
    In some circumstances as we have seen already with SSD solutions. Some will place as competing or replacements while others as complementing. For example in the PCIe flash SSD card segment EMC VFCache is positioned is complementing Dell, EMC, HDS, HP, IBM, NetApp, Oracle or others storage vs. FusionIO who positions as a replacement for the above and others. Another scenario is how some SSD vendors have and continue to position their all-flash SSD arrays using either drives or PCIe cards to complement and coexist with other storage systems in an environment (e.g. data center level tiering) vs. as a replacement. Also keep in mind SSD solutions that also support a mix of flash devices and traditional HDDs for capacity and cost savings or cloud access in the same solution.

    Does this mean that the industry has adopted all SSD appliances as the state of art?
    Avoid confusing industry adoption or talk with industry and customer deployment. They are similar, however one is focused on what the industry talks about or discusses as state of art or the future while the other is what customers are doing. Certainly some of the new flash SSD appliance and storage startups such as Solidfire, Nexgen, Violin, Whiptail or veteran TMS among others have promising futures, some of which may actually be in play with the current SSD market shakeout and consolidation.

    Does that mean everybody is going SSD?
    SSD customer adoption and deployment continues to grow, however so too does the deployment of high-capacity HDDs.

    Storage I/O trends

    Do SSDs need HDDs, do HDDs need SSDs? Yes
    Granted there are environments where needs can be addressed by all of one or the other. However at least near term, there is a very strong market for tiering and mix of SSD, some fast HDDs and lots of high-capacity HDDs to meet various needs including performance, availability, capacity, energy and economics. After all, there is no such thing, as a data or information recession yet budgets are tight or being reduced. Likewise, people and data are living longer.

    What does this mean?
    If there, were no such thing as a data recession and budgets a non-issue, perhaps everything could move to all flash SSD storage systems. However, we also know that people and data are living longer along with changing data life-cycle patterns. There is also the need for performance to close the traditional data center IO performance to space capacity gap and bottlenecks as well as store and keep data longer.

    There will continue to be a need for a mix of high-capacity and high performance. More IO will continue to gravitate towards the IO appliances, however more data will settle in for longer-term retention and continued access as data life-cycle continue to evolve. Watch for more SSD and cache in the large systems, along with higher density SAS-NL (SAS Near Line e.g. high capacity) type drives appearing in those systems.

    If you like new shiny new toys or technology (SNTs) to buy, sell or talk about, there will be plenty of those to continue industry adoption while for those who are focused on industry deployment, there will be a mix of new, and continued evolution for implementation.

    Related links
    Industry adoption vs. industry deployment, is there a difference?

    Industry trend: People plus data are aging and living longer

    No Such Thing as an Information Recession

    Changing Lifecycles & Data Footprint Reduction
    What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do
    Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
    Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
    Are Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) getting too big?
    IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
    Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
    Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
    Researchers and marketers don’t agree on future of nand flash SSD
    EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
    SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part II)

    This is the second of a two part series pertaining to EMC VFCache, you can read the first part here.

    In this part of the series, lets look at some common questions along with comments and perspectives.

    Common questions, answers, comments and perspectives:

    Why would EMC not just go into the same market space and mode as FusionIO, a model that many other vendors seam eager to follow? IMHO many vendors are following or chasing FusionIO thus most are selling in the same way perhaps to the same customers. Some of those vendors can very easily if they were not already also make a quick change to their playbook adding some new moves to reach broader audience.

    Another smart move here is that by taking a companion or complimentary approach is that EMC can continue selling existing storage systems to customers, keep those investments while also supporting competitors products. In addition, for those customers who are slow to adopt the SSD based techniques, this is a relatively easy and low risk way to gain confidence. Granted the disk drive was declared dead several years (and yes also several decades) ago, however it is and will stay alive for many years due to SSD helping to close the IO storage and performance gap.

    Storage IO performance and capacity gap
    Data center and storage IO performance capacity gap (Courtesy of Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press))

    Has this been done before? There have been other vendors who have done LUN caching appliances in the past going back over a decade. Likewise there are PCIe RAID cards that support flash SSD as well as DRAM based caching. Even NetApp has had similar products and functionality with their PAM cards.

    Does VFCache work with other PCIe SSD cards such as FusionIO? No, VFCache is a combination of software IO intercept and intelligent cache driver along with a PCIe SSD flash card (which could be supplied as EMC has indicated from different manufactures). Thus VFCache to be VFCache requires the EMC IO intercept and intelligent cache software driver.

    Does VFCache work with other vendors storage? Yes, Refer to the EMC support matrix, however the product has been architected and designed to install and coexist into a customers existing environment which means supporting different EMC block storage systems as well as those from other vendors. Keep in mind that a main theme of VFCache is to compliment, coexist, enhance and protect customers investments in storage systems to improve their effectiveness and productivity as opposed to replacing them.

    Does VFCache introduce a new point of vendor lockin or stickiness? Some will see or place this as a new form of vendor lockin, others assuming that EMC supports different vendors storage systems downstream as well as offer options for different PCIe flash cards and keeps the solution affordable will assert it is no more lockin that other solutions. In fact by supporting third party storage systems as opposed to replacing them, smart sales people and marketeers will place VFCache as being more open and interoperable than some other PCIe flash card vendors approach. Keep in mind that avoiding vendor lockin is a shared responsibility (read more here).

    Does VFCache work with NAS? VFCache does not work with NAS (NFS or CIFS) attached storage.

    Does VFCache work with databases? Yes, VFCache is well suited for little data (e.g. database) and traditional OLTP or general business application process that may not be covered or supported by other so called big data focused or optimized solutions. Refer to this EMC document (and this document here) for more information.

    Does VFCache only work with little data? While VFCache is well suited for little data (e.g. databases, share point, file and web servers, traditional business systems) it also able to work with other forms of unstructured data.

    Does VFCache need VMware? No, While VFCache works with VMware vSphere including a vCenter plug in, however it does not need a hypervisor and is practical in a physical machine (PM) as it is in a virtual machine (VM).

    Does VFCache work with Microsoft Windows? Yes, Refer to the EMC support matrix for specific server operating systems and hypervisor version support.

    Does VFCache work with other unix platforms? Refer to the EMC support matrix for specific server operating systems and hypervisor version support.

    How are reads handled with VFCache? The VFCache software (driver if you prefer) intercepts IO requests to LUNs that are being cached performing a quick lookup to see if there is a valid cache entry in the physical VFCache PCIe card. If there is a cache hit the IO is resolved from the closer or local PCIe card cache making for a lower latency or faster response time IO. In the case of a cache miss, the VFCache driver simply passes the IO request onto the normal SCSI or block (e.g. iSCSI, SAS, FC, FCoE) stack for processing by the downstream storage system (or appliance). Note that when the requested data is retrieved from the storage system, the VFCache driver will based on caching algorithms determinations place a copy of the data in the PCIe read cache. Thus the real power of the VFCache is the software implementing the cache lookup and cache management functions to leverage the PCIe card that complements the underlying block storage systems.

    How are writes handled with VFCache? Unless put into a write cache mode which is not the default, VFCache software simply passes the IO operation onto the IO stack for downstream processing by the storage system or appliance attached via a block interface (e.g. iSCSI, SAS, FC, FCoE). Note that as part of the caching algorithms, the VFCache software will make determinations of what to keep in cache based on IO activity requests similar to how cache management results in better cache effectiveness in a storage system. Given EMCs long history of working with intelligent cache algorithms, one would expect some of that DNA exists or will be leveraged further in future versions of the software. Ironically this is where other vendors with long cache effectiveness histories such as IBM, HDS and NetApp among others should also be scratching their collective heads saying wow, we can or should be doing that as well (or better).

    Can VFCache be used as a write cache? Yes, while its default mode is to be used as a persistent read cache to compliment server and application buffers in DRAM along with enhance effectiveness of downstream storage system (or appliances) caches, VFCache can also be configured as a persistent write cache.

    Does VFCache include FAST automated tiering between different storage systems? The first version is only a caching tool, however think about it a bit, where the software sits, what storage systems it can work with, ability to learn and understand IO paths and patterns and you can get an idea of where EMC could evolve it to, similar to what they have done with recoverpoint among other tools.

    Changing data access patterns and lifecycles
    Evolving data access patterns and life cycles (more retention and reads)

    Does VFCache mean all or nothing approach with EMC? While the complete VFCache solution comes from EMC (e.g. PCIe card and software), the solution will work with other block attached storage as well as existing EMC storage systems for investment protection.

    Does VFCache support NAS based storage systems? The first release of VFCache only supports block based access, however the server that VFCache is installed in could certainly be functioning as a general purpose NAS (NFS or CIFS) server (see supported operating systems in EMC interoperability notes) in addition to being a database or other other application server.

    Does VFCache require that all LUNs be cached? No, you can select which LUNs are cached and which ones are not.

    Does VFCache run in an active / active mode? In the first release it is active passive, refer to EMC release notes for details.

    Can VFCache be installed in multiple physical servers accessing the same shared storage system? Yes, however refer to EMC release notes on details about active / active vs. active / passive configuration rules for ensuring data integrity.

    Who else is doing things like this? There are caching appliance vendors as well as others such as NetApp and IBM who have used SSD flash caching cards in their storage systems or virtualization appliances. However keep in mind that VFCache is placing the caching function closer to the application that is accessing it there by improving on the locality of reference (e.g. storage and IO effectiveness).

    Does VFCache work with SSD drives installed in EMC or other storage systems? Check the EMC product support matrix for specific tested and certified solutions, however in general if the SSD drive is installed in a storage system that is supported as a block LUN (e.g. iSCSI, SAS, FC, FCoE) in theory it should be possible to work with VFCache. Emphasis, visit the EMC support matrix.
    What type of flash is being used?

    What type of nand flash SSD memory is EMC using in the PCIe card? The first release of VFCache is leveraging enterprise class SLC (Single Level Cell) nand flash which has been used in other EMC products for its endurance, long duty cycle to minnimize or eliminate concerns of wear and tear while meeting read and write performance. EMC has indicated that they will also as part of an industry trend leverage MLC along with Enterprise MLC (EMLC) technologies on a go forward basis.

    Doesnt nand ssd flash cache wear out? While nand flash SSD can wear out over time due to extensive write use, the VFCache approach mitigates this by being primarily a read cache reducing the number or program / erase cycles (P/E cycles) that occur with write operations as well as initially leveraging longer duty cycle SLC flash. EMC also has several years experience from implementing wear leveling algorithms into the storage systems controllers to increase duty cycle and reduce wear on SLC flash which will play forward as MLC or Enterprise MLC (EMLC) techniques are leveraged. This differs from vendors who are positioning their SLC or MLC based flash PCIe SSD cards for mainly write operations which will cause more P/E cycles to occur at a faster rate reducing the duty or useful life of the device.

    How much capacity does the VFCache PCIe card contain? The first release supports a 300GB card and EMC has indicated that added capacity and configuration options are in their plans.

    Does this mean disks are dead? Contrary to popular industry folk lore (or wish) the hard disk drive (HDD) has plenty of life left part of which has been increased by being complimented by VFCache.

    Various options and locations for SSD along with different usage scenarios
    Various SSD locations, types, packaging and usage scenario options

    Can VFCache work in blade servers? The VFCache software is transparent to blade, rack mount, tower or other types of servers. The hardware part of VFCache is a PCIe card which means that the blade server or system will need to be able to accommodate a PCIe card to compliment the PCIe based mezzaine IO card (e.g. iSCSI, SAS, FC, FCOE) used for accessing storage. What this means is that for blade systems or server vendors such as IBM who have a PCIe expansion module for their H series blade systems (it consumes a slot normally used by a server blade), PCIe cache cards like those being initially released by IBM could work, however check with the EMC interoperability matrix, as well as your specific blade server vendor for PCIe expansion capabilities. Given that EMC leverages Cisco UCS for their vBlocks, one would assume that those systems will also see VFCache modules in those systems. NetApp partners with Cisco using UCS in their FlexPods so you see where that could go as well along with potential other server vendors support including Dell, HP, IBM and Oracle among others.

    What about benchmarks? EMC has released some technical documents that show performance improvements in Oracle environments such as this here. Hopefully we will see EMC also release other workloads for different applications including Microsoft Exchange Solutions Proven (ESRP) along with SPC similar to what IBM recently did with their systems among others.

    How do the first EMC supplied workload simulations compare vs. other PCIe cards? This is tough to gauge as many SSD solutions and in particular PCIe cards are doing apples to oranges comparisons. For example to generate a high IOPs rating for marketing purposes, most SSD solutions are stress performance tested at 512 bytes or 1/2 of a KByte or at least 1/8 of a small 4Kbyte IO. Note that operating systems such as Windows are moving to 4Kbyte page allocation size to align with growing IO sizes with databases moving from the old average of 4Kbytes to 8Kbytes and larger. What is important to consider is what is the average IO size and activity profile (e.g. reads vs. writes, random vs. sequential) for your applications. If your application is doing ultra small 1/2 Kbyte IOs, or even smaller 64 byte IOs (which should be handled by better application or file system caching in DRAM), then the smaller IO size and record setting examples will apply. However if your applications are more mainstream or larger, then those smaller IO size tests should be taken with a grain of salt. Also keep latency in mind that many target or oppourtunity applications for VFCache are response time sensitive or can benefit by the improved productivity they enable.

    What is locality of reference? Locality of reference refers to how close data is to where it is being requested or accessed from. The closer the data to the application requesting the faster the response time or quick the work gets done. For example in the figure below L1/L2/L3 on board processor caches are the fastest, yet smallest while closest to the application running on the server. At the other extreme further down the stack, storage becomes large capacity, lower cost, however lower performing.

    Locality of reference data and storage memory

    What does cache effectiveness vs. cache utilization mean? Cache utilization is an indicator of how much the available cache capacity is being used however it does not give an indicator of if the cache is being well used or not. For example, cache could be 100 percent used, however there could be a low hit rate. Thus cache effectiveness is a gauge of how well the available cache is being used to improve performance in terms of more work being done (IOPS or bandwidth) or lower of latency and response time.

    Isnt more cache better? More cache is not better, it is how the cache is being used, this is a message that I would be disappointed in HDS if they were not to bring up as a point of messaging (or rebuttal) given their history of emphasis cache effectiveness vs. size or quantity (Hu, that is a hint btw ;).

    What is the performance impact of VFCache on the host server? EMC is saying greatest of 5 percent or less CPU consumption which they claim is several times less than the competitions worst scenario, as well as claiming 512MB to 1GB of DRM on the server vs. several times that of their competitors. The difference could be expected to be via more off load functioning including flash translation layer (FTL), wear leveling and other optimization being handled by the PCIe card vs. being handled in the servers memory and using host server CPU cycles.

    How does this compare to what NetApp or IBM does? NetApp, IBM and others have done caching with SSD in their storage systems, or leveraging third party PCIe SSD cards from different vendors to be installed in servers to be used as a storage target. Some vendors such as LSI have done caching on the PCIe cards (e.g. CacheCaid which in theory has a similar software caching concept to VFCache) to improve performance and effectiveness across JBOD and SAS devices.

    What about stale (old or invalid) reads, how does VFCache handle or protect against those? Stale reads are handled via the VFCache management software tool or driver which leverages caching algorithms to decide what is valid or invalid data.

    How much does VFCache cost? Refer to EMC announcement pricing, however EMC has indicated that they will be competitive with the market (supply and demand).

    If a server shutdowns or reboots, what happens to the data in the VFCache? Being that the data is in non volatile SLC nand flash memory, information is not lost when the server reboots or loses power in the case of a shutdown, thus it is persistent. While exact details are not know as of this time, it is expected that the VFCache driver and software do some form of cache coherency and validity check to guard against stale reads or discard any other invalid cache entries.

    Industry trends and perspectives

    What will EMC do with VFCache in the future and on a larger scale such as an appliance? EMC via its own internal development and via acquisitions has demonstrated ability to use various clustered techniques such as RapidIO for VMAX nodes, InfiniBand for connecting Isilon  nodes. Given an industry trend with several startups using PCIe flash cards installed in a server that then functions as a IO storage system, it seems likely given EMCs history and experience with different storage systems, caching, and interconnects that they could do something interesting. Perhaps Oracle Exadata III (Exadata I was HP, Exadata II was Sun/Oracle) could be an EMC based appliance (That is pure speculation btw)?

    EMC has already shown how it can use SSD drives as a cache extension in VNX and CLARiiON servers ( FAST CACHE ) in addition to as a target or storage tier combined with Fast for tiering. Given their history with caching algorithms, it would not be surprising to see other instantiations of the technology deployed in complimentary ways.

    Finally, EMC is showing that it can use nand flash SSD in different ways, various packaging forms to apply to diverse applications or customer environments. The companion or complimentary approach EMC is currently taking contrasts with some other vendors who are taking an all or nothing, its all SSD as disk is dead approach. Given the large installed base of disk based systems EMC as well as other vendors have in place, not to mention the investment by those customers, it makes sense to allow those customers the option of when, where and how they can leverage SSD technologies to coexist and complement their environments. Thus with VFCache, EMC is using SSD as a cache enabler to discuss the decades old and growing storage IO to capacity performance gap in a force multiplier model that spreads the cost over more TBytes, PBytes or EBytes while increasing the overall benefit, in other words effectiveness and productivity.

    Additional related material:
    Part I: EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching
    IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
    2012 industry trends perspectives and commentary (predictions)
    Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
    New Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid drive (SSD and HDD)
    Are Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) getting too big?
    Unified storage systems showdown: NetApp FAS vs. EMC VNX
    Industry adoption vs. industry deployment, is there a difference?
    Two companies on parallel tracks moving like trains offset by time: EMC and NetApp
    Data Center I/O Bottlenecks Performance Issues and Impacts
    From bits to bytes: Decoding Encoding
    Who is responsible for vendor lockin
    EMC VPLEX: Virtual Storage Redefined or Respun?
    EMC interoperabity support matrix

    Ok, nuff said for now, I think I see some storm clouds rolling in…

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)

    This is the first part of a two part series covering EMC VFCache, you can read the second part here.

    EMC formerly announced VFCache (aka Project Lightning) an IO accelerator product that comprises a PCIe nand flash card (aka Solid State Device or SSD) and intelligent cache management software. In addition EMC is also talking about the next phase of the flash business unit and project Thunder. The approach EMC is taking with vFCache should not be a surprise given their history of starting out with memory and SSD evolving it into an intelligent cache optimized storage solution.

    Storage IO performance and capacity gap
    Data center and storage IO performance capacity gap (Courtesy of Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press))

    Could we see the future of where EMC will take VFCache along with other possible solutions already being hinted at by the EMC flash business unit by looking where they have been already?

    Likewise by looking at the past can we see the future or how VFCache and sibling product solutions could evolve?

    After all, EMC is no stranger to caching with both nand flash SSD (e.g. FLASH CACHE, FAST and SSD drives) along with DRAM based across their product portfolio not too mention being a core part of their company founding products that evolved into HDDs and more recent nand flash SSDs among others.

    Industry trends and perspectives

    Unlike others who also offer PCIe SSD cards such as FusionIO with a focus on eliminating SANs or other storage (read their marketing), EMC not surprisingly is marching to a different beat. The beat EMC is marching too or perhaps leading by example for others to follow is that of going mainstream and using PCIe SSD cards as a cache to compliment theirs as well as other vendors storage systems vs. replacing them. This is similar to what EMC and other mainstream storage vendors have done in the past such as with SSD drives being used as flash cache extension on CLARiiON or VNX based systems as well as target or storage tier.

    Various options and locations for SSD along with different usage scenarios
    Various SSD locations, types, packaging and usage scenario options

    Other vendors including IBM, NetApp and Oracle among others have also leveraged various packaging options of Single Level Cell (SLC) or Multi Level Cell (MLC) flash as caches in the past. A different example of SSD being used as a cache is the Seagate Momentus XT which is a desktop, workstation consumer type device. Seagate has shipped over a million of the Momentus XT which use SLC flash as a cache to compliment and enhance the integrated HDD performance (a 750GB with 8GB SLC memory is in the laptop Im using to type this with).

    One of the premises of solutions such as those mentioned above for caching is to discuss changing data access patterns and life cycles shown in the figure below.

    Changing data access patterns and lifecycles
    Evolving data access patterns and life cycles (more retention and reads)

    Put a different way, instead of focusing on just big data or corner case (granted some of those are quite large) or ultra large cloud scale out solutions, EMC with VFCache is also addressing their core business which includes little data. What will be interesting to watch and listen too is how some vendors will start to jump up and down saying that they have done or enabling what EMC is announcing for some time. In some cases those vendors will be rightfully doing and making noise on something that they should have made noise about before.

    EMC is bringing the SSD message to the mainstream business and storage marketplace showing how it is a compliment to, vs. a replacement of existing storage systems. By doing so, they will show how to spread the cost of SSD out across a larger storage capacity footprint boosting the effectiveness and productive of those systems. This means that customers who install the VFCache product can accelerate the performance of both their existing EMC as well as storage systems from other vendors preserving their technology along with people skills investment.

     

    Key points of VFCache

    • Combines PCIe SLC nand flash card (300GB) with intelligent caching management software driver for use in virtualized and traditional servers

    • Making SSD complimentary to existing installed block based disk (and or SSD) storage systems to increase their effectiveness

    • Providing investment protection while boosting productivity of existing EMC and third party storage in customer sites

    • Brings caching closer to the application where the data is accessed while leverage larger scale direct attached and SAN block storage

    • Focusing message for SSD back on to little data as well as big data for mainstream broad customer adoption scenarios

    • Leveraging benefit and strength of SSD as a read cache and scalable of underlying downstream disk for data storage

    • Reducing concerns around SSD endurance or duty cycle wear and tear by using as a read cache

    • Off loads underlying storage systems from some read requests enabling them to do more work for other servers

    Additional related material:
    Part II: EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching
    IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
    2012 industry trends perspectives and commentary (predictions)
    Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
    New Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid drive (SSD and HDD)
    Are Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) getting too big?
    Unified storage systems showdown: NetApp FAS vs. EMC VNX
    Industry adoption vs. industry deployment, is there a difference?
    Two companies on parallel tracks moving like trains offset by time: EMC and NetApp
    Data Center I/O Bottlenecks Performance Issues and Impacts
    From bits to bytes: Decoding Encoding
    Who is responsible for vendor lockin
    EMC VPLEX: Virtual Storage Redefined or Respun?
    EMC interoperabity support matrix

    Ok, nuff said for now, I think I see some storm clouds rolling in…

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2012 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Posted on

    IT and technology turkeys

    Now that Halloween and talk of Zombies has past (at least for now), that means next up on the social or holiday calendar topics in the U.S. is thanksgiving which means turkey themes.

    With turkey themes in mind, how about some past, current and maybe future technology flops or where are they now.

    A technology turkey can be a product, trend, technique or theme that was touted (or hyped) and flopped for various reasons not flying up to, or meeting its expectations. That means that a technology turkey may have had industry adoption however lacked customer deployment.

    Lets try a few, how about holographic storage, or is that still a future technology?

    Were NEXT computer and the Apple Newton turkeys?

    Disclosure: I have a Newton that has not been used since the mid 90s.

    Is ATA over Ethernet (AoE) a future turkey candidate along with FCoE aka Fibre Channel over Ethernet (or here or here), or is that just some peoples wishful thinking regarding FCoE being a turkey?

    Speaking of AoE, what ever happened to Zetera (aka Hammer storage) the iSCSI alternative of a few years ago?

    To be fair how about IPFC not to be confused with FCIP (Fibre Channel frames mapped to IP for distance) or iFCP not to be confused with FCoE or iSCSI. IPFC mapped IP as upper level protocol (ULP) onto Fibre Channel coexisting with FCP and FICON. There were only a few adopters of IPFC that used it as a low latency channel to channel (CTC) mechanism for open systems before InfiniBand and other technologies matured.

    Im guessing that someone will step up to defend the honor of Microsoft Windows Vista, however until then, IMHO it is or was a Turkey. While on the topic of operating systems, anyone have an opinion on IBMs OS2? Speaking of PCs, how about the DEC Rainbow and its sibling the Robin? Remember when IBM was in the PC business before selling it off to Lenovo, how about the IBM PCjr, turkey candidate or not?

    HP should be on the turkey list with their now ex CEO Leo Apotheker whom they put out to pasture, on the technology front, anybody remember AutoRAID?

    How about the Britton Lee Database machine which today would be referred to as a storage appliance or application optimized storage system such as the Oracle Exadata II (or Oracle Exadata I based on HP hardware) among others. Note that Im not saying Exadata I or Exadata II are turkeys as that will be left to your own determination. Both are cool from a technology standpoint, however there is more to having neat or interesting technology to move from announcement to industry adoption to customer deployment, things that Oracle has been having some success with.

    Speaking of Oracle, remember when Sun bought the Encore storage system and renamed it the A7000 (not to be confused with the A5000 aka Photon) in an attempt to compete against the EMC Symmetrix. The Encore folks after Sun went on to their next project and still today call it DataCore. Meanwhile Sun discontinued the A7000 after a period of time similar to what they did with other acquisitions such as Pirus which became the 6920 which was end of lifed as part of a deal where Sun increased their resell activity of HDS which too has since been archived. Hmmm, that begs the question of what happens with Oracle acquiring Pillar with an earn out scheme where if there is revenue there is a payout, if there is no revenue then there is a tax write off.

    What about big data, will that become a turkey following in the footsteps of other former high flyers such as cloud, virtualization, data classification, CDP, Green IT and SOA among many others. IMHO that depends upon what your view or definition along with expectations of big data is as a buzzword bingo topic. Depending on your view, that will determine if the above will join others that fade away from the limelight shifting into productive modes for customers and profitable activity for vendors.

    Want to read what others have to say about technology turkeys or flops?

    Here is what ibitimes has to say about technology flops (aka) turkeys, with Infoworlds lineup here, Computerworlds list is here. Meanwhile a couple from mashable here and here, Cnet weighs in here, with another list over at investorplace found here, and checkout the list at Money here with the telegraph represented here. Of course you could Google to find more however you would probably also stumble upon Googles own flops or technology turkeys including wave.

    What is your take as to other technology turkeys past, present or future?

    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

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2011 StorageIO and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved