Unified storage systems showdown: NetApp FAS vs. EMC VNX

Unified storage systems that support concurrent block, file and in some cases object based access have become popular in terms of industry adoption as well as customer deployments with solutions from many vendors across different price bands, or market (customer) sectors. Two companies that are leaders in this space are also squared off against each other (here and here) to compete for existing, each others, as well as new customers in adjacent or different markets. Those companies are EMC and NetApp that I have described as two similar companies on parallel tracks offset by time.

Two companies on parralel tracks offset by time

Recently I was asked to provide some commentary about unified storage systems in general, as well as EMC and NetApp that you can read here, or view additional commentary on related themes here, here and here. EMC has a historical block based storage DNA that has evolved to file and object based while NetApp originated in the file space having moved into block based storage along with object based access. EMC converged various product technologies including those developed organically (e.g. internally) as well as via acquisition as part of their unified approach. NetApp who has had a unified produce has more recently added a new line of block products with their acquisition of Engenio from LSI. Obviously there are many other vendors with unified storage solutions that are either native (e.g. the functionality is built into the actual technology) or by parterning with others to combine their block or file based solutions as a unified offering.

What is unified storage, what does it enable, and why is it popular now?
Over the past couple of years, multifunction systems that can do both block- and file-based storage have become more popular. These systems simplify the acquisition process by removing the need to choose while enabling flexibility to use something else later. NAS solutions have evolved to support both NFS and CIFS and other TCP-based protocols, including HTTP and FTP, concurrently. NAS or file sharing–based storage continues to gain popularity because of its ease of use and built-in data management capabilities. However, some applications, including Microsoft Exchange or databases, either require block-based storage using SAS, iSCSI, or Fibre Channel, or have manufacture configuration guidelines for block-based storage.

Multi protocol storage products enable the following:

  • Acquisition and installation without need for a specialist
  • Use by professionals with varied skills
  • Reprovisioning for different applications requirements
  • Expansion and upgrades to boost future capacity needs
  • Figure 1 shows variations of how storage systems, gateways, or appliances can provide multiple functionality support with various interfaces and protocols. The exact protocols, interfaces, and functionality supported by a given system, software stack, gateway, or appliance will vary by specific vendor implementation. Most solutions provide some combination of block and file storage, with increasing support for various object-based access as well. Some solutions provide multiple block protocols concurrently, while others support block, file, and object over Ethernet interfaces. In addition to various front-end or server and application-facing support, solutions also commonly utilize multiple back-end interfaces, protocols, and tiered storage media.

    Unified and multiprotocol storage, learn more in Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press, 2011)

    Figure 1: Multi protocol and function unified storage examples

    For low-end SMB, ROBO, workgroup, SOHO, and consumers, the benefit of multi protocol and unified storage solutions is similar to that of a multifunction printer, copier, fax, and scanner—that is, many features and functionality in a common footprint that is easy to acquire, install, and use in an affordable manner.

    For larger environments, the value proposition of multi protocol and multi functionality is the flexibility and ability to adapt to different usage scenarios that enable a storage system to take on more personalities. What this means is that by being able to support multiple interfaces and protocols along with different types of media and functionality, a storage system becomes multifunctional. A multifunction storage system may be configured for on-line primary storage with good availability and performance and for lower-cost, high-capacity storage in addition to being used as backup target. In other scenarios, a multifunction device may be configured to perform a single function with the idea of later redeploying it to use a different personality or mode of functionality.

    An easy way to determine whether you need multi protocol storage is to look at your environment and requirements. If all you need is FC, FCoE, SAS, iSCSI, or NAS, and a multi protocol device is going to cost you more, it may not be a good fit.

    If you think you may ever need multi protocol capability, and there’s no extra charge for it, go ahead. If you’re not being penalized in performance, extra management software fees, functionality or availability, and you have the capability, why wouldnt you implement a unified storage system?

    Look for products that have the ability to scale to meet your current and future storage capacity, performance, and availability needs or that can coexist under common management with additional storage systems.

    Vendors of unified storage in addition to EMC and NetApp include BlueArc, Fujitsu, Dell, Drobo, HDS (with BlueArc), HP, IBM, Huawei, Oracle, Overland, Quantum, Symantec and Synology among others.

    So what does this all mean? Simple, if you are not already using unified storage in some shape or form, either at work or perhaps even at home, most likely it will be in your future. Thus the question of not if, rather when, where, with what and how.

    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

    Congratulations to Infosmack on episode 100

    Congratulations to the Infosmack crew hosts Greg Knieriemen and Marc Farley with the Diva of Disruptive Technologies, Christina Weil on their 100th episode. This episode included Robin Harris of StorageMojo and myself as guests.

    Some items discussed in the 100th episode include Infosmack Live from the upcoming Dell Storage Forum, Cisco and the future of or with EMC and VMware, NetApp merger and acquisition activity, Sony and the death of Blu-ray, streaming video and related themes among others. Give it a listen when you get a chance and congratulations on the 100th episode.

    Ok, nuff said

    Cheers Gs

    Greg Schulz – Author The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC), Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier) and coming summer 2011 Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC)
    twitter @storageio

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

    NetApp buying LSIs Engenio Storage Business Unit

    Storage I/O trends

    This has been a busy week as on Monday Western Digital (WD) announced that they were buying the disk drive business from Hitachi Ltd. (e.g. HGST) for about $4.3 billion USD. The deal includes about $3.5B in cash and 25 million WD common shares (e.g. $750M USD) which will give Hitachi Ltd. about ten (10) percent ownership in WD along with adding two Hitachi persons onto the WD board of directors. WD now moves into the number one hard disk drive (HDD) spot above Seagate (note Hitachi is not selling HDS) in addition to giving them a competitive positioning in both the enterprise HDD as well as emerging SSD markets.

    Today NetApp announced that they have agreed to purchase portions of the LSI storage business known as Engenio for $480M USD.

    The business and technology that LSI is selling to NetApp (aka Engenio) is the external storage system business that accounted for about $705M of their approximate $900M+ storage business in 2010. This piece of the business represents external (outside of the server) shared RAID storage systems that support Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), iSCSI, Fibre Channel (FC) and emerging FCoE (Fibre Channel over Ethernet) with SSD, SAS and FC high performance HDDs as well as high capacity HDDs. NetApp has block however there strong suit (sorry netapp guys) is file while Engenio strong suit is block that attaches to gateways from NetApp as well as others in addition to servers for scale out NAS and cloud.

    What NetApp is getting from LSI is the business that sells storage systems or their components to OEMs including Dell, IBM (here and here), Oracle, SGI and TeraData (a former NCR spin off) among others.

    What LSI is retaining are their custom storage silicon, ICs, PCI RAID adapter and host bus adapter (HBA) cards including MegaRAID, 3ware along with SAS chips, SAS switches, PCI SSD card and the Onstor NAS product they acquired about a year ago. Other parts of the LSI business which makes chips for storage, networking and communications vendors is also not affected by this deal.

    In other words, the sign in front of the Wichita LSI facility that used to say NCR will now probably include a NetApp logo once the deal closes.

    For those not familiar, Tom Georgens current CEO of NetApp is very familiar with Engenio and LSI as he used to work there (after leaving a career at EMC). In fact Mr. Georgens was part of the most recent attempt to spin the external storage business out of LSI back in the mid 2000s when it received the Engenio name and branding. In addition to Tom Georgens, Vic Mahadevan the current NetApp Chief Strategy Officer recently worked at LSI and before that at BMC, Compaq and Maxxan among others.

    What do I mean by the most recent attempt to spin the storage business out of LSI? Simple, the Engenio storage business traces its lineage back to NCR and what become known as Symbiosis Logic that LSI acquired as part of some other acquisitions.

    Going back to the late 90s, there was word on the street that the then LSI management was not sure what to do with storage business as their core business was and still is making high volume chips and related technologies. Current LSI CEO Abhi Talwalkar is a chip guy (nothing wrong with that) who honed his skills at Intel. Thus it should not be a surprise that there is a focus on the LSI core business model of making their own as well as producing silicon (not the implant stuff) for IT and consumer electronics (read their annual report).

    As part of the acquisition, LSI has already indicated that they will use all or some of the cash to buy back their stock. However I also wonder if this does not open the door for Abhi and his team to do some other acquisitions more synergic with their core business.

    What does NetApp get:

    • Expanded OEM and channel distribution capabilities
    • Block based products to coexist with their NAS gateways
    • Business with an established revenue base
    • Footprint into new or different markets
    • Opportunity to sell different product set to existing customers

    NetApp gets an OEM channel distribution model to complement what they already have (mainly IBM) in addition to their mainly direct sales and with VARs. Note that Engenio went to an all OEM/distribution model several years ago maintaining direct touch support for their partners.

    Note that NetApp is providing financial guidance that the deal could add $750M to FY12 which is based on retaining some portion of the existing OEM business however moving into new markets as well as increasing product diversity with existing direct customers, vars or channel partners.

    NetApp also gets to address storage market fragmentation and enable OEM as well as channel diversification including selling to other server vendors besides IBM. The Engenio model in addition to supporting Dell, IBM, Oracle, SGI and other server vendors also involves working with vertical solution integrator OEMs in the video, entertainment, High Performance Compute (HPC), cloud and MSP markets. This means that NetApp can enter new markets where bandwidth performance is needed including scale out NAS (beyond what NetApp has been doing). This also means that NetApp gets a product to sell into markets where back end storage for big data, bulk storage, media and entertainment, cloud and MSP as well as other applications leverage SAS, iSCSI or FC and FCoE beyond what their current lineup offers. Who sells into those spaces? Dell, HP, IBM, Oracle, SGI and Supermicro among others.

    What does LSI get:

    • $480M USD cash and buy back some stock to keep investors happy
    • Streamline their business or open door for new ones
    • Perhaps increase OEM sales to other new or existing customers
    • Perhaps do some acquisitions or be acquired

    What does Engenio get:
    A new parent that hopefully invest in the technology and marketing of the solution sets as well as leverage or take care of the installed base of customers

    What do the combined Engenio and NetApp OEMs and partners get:
    With combination of the organizations, hopefully streamlined support, service, and marketing, product enhancements to address new or different needs. Possibly comfort in knowing that Engenio now has a home and its future somewhat known.

    What about the Engenio employees?
    The reason I bring this up is wondering what happens to those who have many years invested and their LSI stock which I presume they keep hoping that the sale gives them a future return on their investment or efforts. Having been in similar acquisitions in the past, it can be a rough go however if the acquirer has a bright future, than enough said.

    Some random thoughts:

    Is this one of those industry trendy, sexy, cool everybody drooling type deals with new and upcoming technology and marketing buzz?
    No

    Is this one of those industry deals that has good upside potential if executed upon and leveraged?
    Yes

    Netapp already has a storage offering why do they need Engenio?
    No offense to NetApp, however they have needed a robust block storage offering to complement their NAS file serving and extensive software functionality to move into to different markets. This is not all that different from what EMC needed to do in the late 90s extending their capabilities from their sole cash cow platform Symmetrix to acquire DG to have a mid range offering.

    NetApp is risking $480M on a business with technologies that some see or say is on the decline, so why would they do such a thing?
    Ok, lets set the technology topics aside, from a pure numbers perspective, lets take two scenarios and Im not a financial person so go easy on me please. What some financial people have told me with other deals is that its sometimes about getting a return on cash vs. it not doing anything. So with that and other things in mind, say NetApp just lets $480M sit in the bank, can they get 12 per cent or better interest? Probably not and if they can, I want the name of that bank. What that means is that for a five year period, if they could get that rate of return (12 percent), they would only make $824M-480M=$344M on the investment (I know, there are tax and other financial considerations however lets keep simple). Now lets take another scenario, assume that NetApp simply rides a decline of the business at say a 20 percent per year rate (how many business are growing or in storage declining at 20 percent per year?) for five years. That works out to about a $1.4B yield. Lets take a different scenario and assume that NetApp can simply maintain an annual run rate of $700-750M for that five years, that works out to around $3.66B-480M=$3.1B revenue or return on investment. In other words, even with some decline, over a five year period, the OEM business pays for the deal alone and perhaps helps funds investment in technology improvement with the business balance being positive upside.

    Now both of those are extreme scenarios so lets take something more likely such as NetApp being able to simply maintain a 700-750M run rate by keeping some of the OEM business, finding new markets for challenge and OEM as well as direct, expanding footprint into their markets. Now that math gets even more interesting. Having said all of that, NetApp needs to keep investing in the business and products to get those returns which might help explain the relative low price to run rate.

    Is this a good deal for NetApp?
    IMHO yes, as long as NetApp does not screw it up. If NetApp can manage the business, invest in it, grow into new markets instead of simple cannibalization, they will have made a good deal similar to what EMC did with DG back in the late 90s. However NetApp needs to execute, leverage what they are buying, invest in it and pick up new business to make up for the declining business with some of the OEMs.

    With several hundred thousand systems or controllers having been sold over the years (granted how many are actually running is your guess as good as mine), NetApp has a footprint to leverage with their other products. For example, should IBM, Dell or Oracle completely walk away from those installed footprints, NetApp can move in with firmware or other upgrades to support plus up sell with their NAS gateways to add value with compression, dedupe, etc.

    What about NetApps acquisition track record?
    Fair question although Im sure the NetApp faithful wont like it. NetApp has had their ups and downs with acquisitions (Topio, Decru, Spinaker, Onaro, etc), perhaps with this one like EMC in the late 90s who bought DG to overcome some rough up and down acquisitions can also get their mojo on. (See this post).While we are on the topic of acquisitions, NetApp recently bought Akorri and last year Bycast which they now call StorageGrid that has been OEMd in the past by IBM. Guess what storage was commonly used under the IBM servers running the Bycast software? If you guessed XIV you might want to take a mulligan or a do over. Btw, HP also has OEMd the Bycast software. If you are not familiar with Bycast and interested in automated movement, tiering, policy management, objects and other buzzwords, ping your favorite NetApp person as it is a diamond in the rough if leveraged beyond healthcare capabilities.

    What does this mean for Xyratex and Dothill who are NetApp partners?
    My guess is that for now, the general purpose enclosures would stay the same (e.g. Xyratex) until there is a business case to do something different. For the high density enclosures, that could be a different scenario. As for others, we will have to wait and see.

    Will NetApp port OnTap into Engenio?
    The easiest and fastest thing is to do what NetApp and Engenio OEM customers have already been doing, that is, place the Engenio arrays behind the NetApp fas vfiler. Note that Engenio has storage systems that speak SAS to HDDs and SSDs as well as able to speak SAS, iSCSI and FC to hosts or gateways. NetApp has also embraced SAS for back end storage, maybe we will see them leverage a SAS connection out of their filers in the future to SAS storage systems or shelves instead of FC loop?

    Speaking of SAS host or server attached storage, guess what many cloud, MSP, high performance and other environment are using for storage on the back end of their clusters or scale out NAS systems?
    Yup, SAS.

    Guess what gap NetApp gets to fill joining Dell, HP, IBM and Oracle who can now give a choice of SAS, iSCSI or FC in addition or NAS?
    Yup, SAS.

    Care to guess what storage vendor we can expect to hear downplay SAS as a storage system to server or gateway technology?
    Hmm

    Is this all about SAS?
    No

    Will this move scare EMC?
    No, EMC does not get scared, or at least that is what they tell me.

    Will LSI buy Fusion IO who has or is filing their documents to IPO or someone else?
    Your guess or speculation is better than mine. However LSI already has and is retaining their own PCIe SSD card.

    Why only $480M for a business that did $705M in 2010?
    Good question. There is risk in that if NetApp does not invest in the product, marketing, relationships that they will not see the previous annual run rate so it is not a straight annuity. Consequently NetApp is taking risk with the business and thus they should get the reward if they can run with it. Another reason is that there probably were not any investment bankers or brokers running up the price.

    Why didnt Dell buy Engenio for $480M?
    Good question, if they had the chance, they should have however it probably would not have been a good fit as Dell needs direct sales vs. OEM sales.

    Ok, nuff said (for now)

    Cheers gs

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

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

    IBMs Storwize or wise Storage, the V7000 and DFR

    A few months ago IBM bought a Data Footprint Reduction (DFR) technology company called Storwize (read more about DFR and Storwize Real time Compression here, here, here, here and here).

    A couple of weeks ago IBM renamed the Storwize real time compression technology to surprise surprise, IBM real time compression (wow, wonder how lively that market focus research group study discussion was).

    Subsequently IBM recycled the Storwize name in time to be used for the V7000 launch.

    Now to be clear right up front, currently the V7000 does not include real time compression capabilities, however I would look for that and other forms of DFR techniques to appear on an increasing basis in IBM products in the future.

    IBM has a diverse storage portfolio with good products some with longer legs than others to compete in the market. By long legs, that means both technology and marketability for enabling their direct as well as partners including distributors or vars to effectively compete with other vendors offerings.

    The enablement capability of the V7000 will be to give IBM and their business partners a product that they will want go tell and sell to customers competing with Cisco, Dell, EMC, Fujitsu, HDS, HP, NEC, NetApp and Oracle among others.

    What about XIV?

    For those interested in XIV regardless of if you are a fan, nay sayer or simply an observer, here, here and here are some related posts to view if you like (as well as comment on).

    Back to the V7000

    A couple of common themes about the IBM V7000 are:

    • It appears to be a good product based on the SVC platform with many enhancements
    • Expanding the industry scope and focus awareness around Data Footprint Reduction (DFR)
    • Branding the storwize acquisition as real-time compression as part of their DFR portfolio
    • Confusion about using the Storwize name for a storage virtualization solution
    • Lack of Data Footprint Reduction (DFR) particularly real-time compression (aka Storwize)
    • Yet another IBM storage product adding to confusion around product positioning

    Common questions that Im being asked about the IBM V7000 include among others:

    • Is the V7000 based on LSI, NetApp or other third party OEM technology?

      No, it is based on the IBM SVC code base along with an XIV like GUI and features from other IBM products.

    • Is the V7000 based on XIV?

      No, as mentioned above, the V7000 is based on the IBM SVC code base along with an XIV like GUI and features from other IBM products.

    • Does the V7000 have DFR such as dedupe or compression?

      No, not at this time other than what was previously available with the SVC.

    • Does this mean there will be a change or defocusing on or of other IBM storage products?

      IMHO I do not think so other than perhaps around XIV. If anything, I would expect IBM to start pushing the V7000 as well as the entire storage product portfolio more aggressively. Now there could be some defocusing on XIV or put a different way, putting all products on the same equal footing and let the customer determine what they want based on effective solution selling from IBM and their business partners.

    • What does this mean for XIV is that product no longer the featured or marquee product?

      IMHO XIV remains relevant for the time being. However, I also expect to be put on equal footprint with other IBM products or, if you prefer, other IBM products particularly the V7000 to be unleashed to compete with other external vendors solutions such as those from Cisco, Dell, EMC, Fujitsu, HDS, HP, NEC, NetApp and Oracle among others. Read more here, here and here about XIV remaining relevant.

    • Why would I not just buy an SVC and add storage to it?

      That is an option and strength of SVC to sit in front of different IBM storage products as well as those of third party competitors. However with the V7000 customers now have a turnkey storage solution to sell instead of a virtualization appliance.

    • Is this a reaction to EMC VPLEX, HDS VSP, HP SVSP or 3PAR, Oracle/Sun 7000?

      Perhaps it is, perhaps it is a reaction to XIV, and perhaps it is a realization that IBM has a lot of IP that could be combined into a solution to respond to a market need among many other scenarios. However, IBM has had a virtualization platform with a decent installed base in the form of SVC which happens to be at the heart of the V7000.

    • Does this mean IBM is jumping on the using off the shelf server instead of purpose built hardware for storage systems bandwagon like Oracle, HP and others are doing?

      If you are new to storage or IBM, it might appear that way, however, IBM has been shipping storage systems that are based on general purpose servers for a couple for a couple of decades now. Granted, some of those products are based on IBM Power PC (e.g. power platform) also used in their pSeries formerly known as the RS6000s. For example, the DS8000 series similar to its predecessors the ESS (aka Shark) and VSS before that have been based on the Power platform. Likewise, SVC has been based on general purpose processors since its inception.

      Likewise, while only generally deployed in two node pairs, the DS8000 is architected to scale into many more nodes that what has been shipped meaning that IBM has had clustered storage for some time, granted, some of their competitors will dispute that.

    • How does the V7000 stack up from a performance standpoint?

      Interestingly, IBM has traditionally been very good if not out front running public benchmarks and workload simulations ranging from SPC to TPC to SPEC to Microsoft ESRP among others for all of their storage systems except one (e.g. XIV). However true to traditional IBM systems and storage practices, just a couple of weeks after the V7000 launch, IBM has released the first wave of performance comparisons including SPC for the V7000 which can be seen here to compare with others.

    • What do I think of the V7000?

      Like other products both in the IBM storage portfolio or from other vendors, the V7000 has its place and in that place which needs to be further articulated by IBM, it has a bright future. I think that the V7000 for many environments particularly those that were looking at XIV will be a good IBM based solution as well as competitor to other solutions from Dell, EMC, HDS, HP, NetApp, Oracle as well as some smaller startups providers.

    Comments, thoughts and perspectives:

    IBM is part of a growing industry trend realizing that data footprint reduction (DFR) focus should expand the scope beyond backup and dedupe to span an entire organization using many different tools, techniques and best practices. These include archiving of databases, email, file systems for both compliance and non compliance purposes, backup/restore modernization or redesign, compression (real-time for online and post processing). In addition, DFR includes consolidation of storage capacity and performance (e.g. fast 15K SAS, caching or SSD), data management (including some data deletion where practical), data dedupe, space saving snapshots such as copy on write or redirect on write, thin provisioning as well as virtualization for both consolidation and enabling agility.

    IBM has some great products, however too often with such a diverse product portfolio better navigation and messaging of what to use when, where and why is needed not to mention the confusion over the current product dejur.

    As has been the case for the past couple of years, lets see how this all plays out in a year or so from now. Meanwhile cast your vote or see the results of others as to if XIV remains relevant. Likewise, join in on the new poll below as to if the V7000 is now relevant or not.

    Note: As with the ongoing is XIV relevant polling (above), for the new is the V7000 relevant polling (below) you are free to vote early, vote often, vote for those who cannot or that care not to vote.

    Here are some links to read more about this and related topics:

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Re visiting if IBM XIV is still relevant with V7000

    Over the past couple of years I routinely get asked what I think of XIV by fans as well as foes in addition to many curious or neutral onlookers including XIV competitors, other analysts, media, bloggers, consultants as well as IBM customers, prospects, vars and business partners. Consequently I have done some blog posts about my thoughts and perspectives.

    Its time again for what has turned out to be the third annual perspective or thoughts around IBM XIV and if it is still relevant as a result of the recent IBM V7000 (excuse me, I meant to say IBM Storwize V7000) storage system launch.

    For those wanting to take a step back in time, here is an initial thought perspective about IBM and XIV storage from 2008, as well as the 2009 revisiting of XIV relevance post and the latest V7000 companion post found here.

    What is the IBM V7000?

    Here is a link to a companion post pertaining to the IBM V7000 that you will want to have a look at.

    In a nut shell, the V7000 is a new storage system with built in storage virtualization or virtual storage if you prefer that leverages IBM developed software from its San Volume Controller (SVC), DS8000 enterprise system and others.

    Unlike the SVC which is a gateway or appliance head that virtualizes various IBM and third party storage systems providing data movement, migration, copy, replication, snapshot and other agility or abstraction capabilities, the V7000 is a turnkey integrated solution.

    By being a turnkey solution, the V7000 combines the functionality of the SVC as a basis for adding other IBM technologies including a GUI management tool similar to that found on XIV along with dedicated attached storage (e.g. SAS disk drives including fast, high capacity as well as SSD).

    In other words, for those customer or prospects who liked XIV because of its management GUI interface, you may like the V7000.

    For those who liked the functionality capabilities of the SVC however needed it to be a turnkey solution, you might like the V7000.

    For those of you who did not like or competed with the SVC in the past, well, you know what to do.

    BTW, for those who knew of Storwize the Data Footprint Reduction (DFR) vendor with real time compression that IBM recently acquired and renamed IBM Real time Compression, the V7000 does not contain any real time compression (yet).

    What are my thoughts and perspectives?

    In addition to the comments in the companion post found here, right now Im of the mind set that XIV does not fade away quietly into the sunset or take a timeout at the IBM technology rest and recuperation resort located on the beautiful someday isle.

    The reason I think XIV will remain somewhat relevant for some time, (time to be determined of course) is that IBM has expended over the past two and half years significant resources to promote it. Those resources have included marketing time, messaging space and in some instances perhaps inadvertinly at the expense of other IBM storage solutions. Simiarly, a lot of time, money and effort have gone into business partner outreach to establish and keep XIV relevant with those commuities who in turn have gone to their customers to tell and sell the XIV story to some customers who have bought it.

    Consequently or as a result of all of that investment, I would be surprised if IBM were simply to walk away from XIV at least near term.

    What I do see as happening including some early indicators is that the V7000 (along with other IBM products) now will be getting equal billing, resources and promotional support. Weather this means the XIV division finally being assimilated into the mainstream IBM fold and on equal footing with other IBM products, or, that other IBM products being brought up to an elevated position of XIV is subject to interpretation and your own perception.

    I expect to continue to see IBM teams and subsequently their distributors, vars and other business partners get more excited talking about the V7000 along with other IBM solutions. For example, SONAS for bulk, clustered and scale out NAS, DS8000 for high end, GMAS and Information Archive platforms as well as N and DS3K/DS4K/DS5K not to mentiuon the TS/TL backup and archive target platforms along with associated Tivoli software. Also, lets not forget about SVC among other IBM solutions including of course, XIV.

    I would also not be surprised if some of the diehard XIV loyalist (e.g. sales and marketing reps that were faithful members of Moshe Yani army who appears to be MIA at IBM) pack up their bags and leave the IBM storage SANdbox in virtual protest. That is, refusing to be assimilated into the general IBM storage pool and thus leaving for Greener IT pastures elsewhere. Some will stick around discovering the opportunities associated with selling a broader more diverse product portfolio into their target accounts where they have spent time and resources to establish relationships or getting thier proverbial foot in the door.

    Consequently, I think XIV remains somewhat relevant for now given all of the resources that IBM poured into it and relationships that their partner ecosystem also spent on establishing with the installed customer base.

    However, I do think that the V7000 despite some confusion (here and here) around its recycled Storwize name that is built around the field proven SVC and other IBM technology has some legs. Those legs of the V7000 are both from a technology standpoint as well as a means to get the entire IBM systems and storage group energized to go out and compete with their primary nemesis (e.g. Dell, EMC, HP, HDS, NetApp and Oracle among others).

    As has been the case for the past couple of years, lets see how this all plays out in a year or so from now. Meanwhile cast your vote or see the results of others as to if XIV remains relevant. Likewise, join in on the new poll below as to if the V7000 is now relevant or not.

    Note: As with the ongoing is XIV relevant polling (above), for the new is the V7000 relevant polling (below) you are free to vote early, vote often, vote for those who cannot or that care not to vote.

    Here are some links to read more about this and related topics:

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Back to school shopping: Dude, Dell Digests 3PAR Disk storage

    Dell

    No sooner has the dust settled from Dells other recent acquisitions, its back to school shopping time and the latest bargain for the Round Rock Texas folks is bay (San Francisco) area storage vendor 3PAR for $1.15B. As a refresh, some of Dells more recent acquisitions including a few years ago $1.4B for EqualLogic, $3.9B for Perot systems not to mention Exanet, Kace and Ocarina earlier this year. For those interested, as of April 2010 reporting figures found here, Dell showed about $10B USD in cash and here is financial information on publicly held 3PAR (PAR).

    Who is 3PAR
    3PAR is a publicly traded company (PAR) that makes a scalable or clustered storage system with many built in advanced features typically associated with high end EMC DMX and VMAX as well as CLARiiON, in addition to Hitachi or HP or IBM enterprise class solutions. The Inserv (3PARs storage solution) combines hardware and software providing a very scalable solution that can be configured for smaller environments or larger enterprise by varying the number of controllers or processing nodes, connectivity (server attachment) ports, cache and disk drives.

    Unlike EqualLogic which is more of a mid market iSCSI only storage system, the 3PAR Inserv is capable of going head to head with the EMC CLARiiON as well as DMC or VMAX systems that support a mix of iSCSI and Fibre Channel or NAS via gateway or appliances. Thus while there were occasional competitive situations between 3PAR and Dell EqualLogic, they for the most part were targeted at different market sectors or customers deployment scenarios.

    What does Dell get with 3PAR?

    • A good deal if not a bargain on one of the last new storage startup pure plays
    • A public company that is actually generating revenue with a large and growing installed base
    • A seasoned sales force who knows how to sell into the enterprise storage space against EMC, HP, IBM, Oracle/SUN, Netapp and others
    • A solution that can scale in terms of functionality, connectivity, performance, availability, capacity and energy efficiency (PACE)
    • Potential route to new markets where 3PAR has had success, or to bridge gaps where both have played and competed in the past
    • Did I say a company with an established footprint of installed 3PAR Inserv storage systems and good list of marquee customers
    • Ability to sell a solution that they own the intellectual property (IP) instead of that of partner EMC
    • Plenty of IP that can be leveraged within other Dell solutions, not to mention combine 3PAR with other recently acquired technologies or companies.

    On a lighter note, Dell picks up once again Marc Farley who was with them briefly after the EqualLogic acquisition who then departed to 3PAR where he became director of social media including launch of Infosmack on Storage Monkeys with co host Greg Knieriemen (@Knieriemen). Of course the twitter world and traditional coconut wires are now speculating where Farley will go next that Dell may end up buying in the future.

    What does this mean for Dell and their data storage portfolio?
    While in no ways all inclusive or comprehensive, table 1 provides a rough framework of different price bands, categories, tiers and market or application segments requiring various types of storage solutions where Dell can sell into.

     

    HP

    Dell

    EMC

    IBM

    Oracle/Sun

    Servers

    Blade systems, rack mount, towers to desktop

    Blade systems, rack mount, towers to desktop

    Virtual servers with VMware, servers via vBlock servers via Cisco

    Blade systems, rack mount, towers to desktop

    Blade systems, rack mount, towers to desktop

    Services

    HP managed services, consulting and hosting supplemented by EDS acquisition

    Bought Perot systems (an EDS spin off/out)

    Partnered with various organizations and services

    Has been doing smaller acquisitions adding tools and capabilities to IBM global services

    Large internal consulting and services as well as Software as a Service (SaaS) hosting, partnered with others

    Enterprise storage

    XP (FC, iSCSI, FICON for mainframe and NAS with gateway) which is OEMed from Hitachi Japan parent of HDS

    3PAR (iSCSI and FICON or NAS with gateway) replaces EMC CLARiiON or perhaps rare DMX/VMAX at high end?

    DMX and VMAX

    DS8000

    Sun resold HDS version of XP/USP however Oracle has since dropped it from lineup

    Data footprint impact reduction

    Dedupe on VTL via Sepaton plus HP developed technology or OEMed products

    Dedupe in OEM or partner software or hardware solutions, recently acquired Ocarina

    Dedupe in Avamar, Datadomain, Networker, Celerra, Centera, Atmos. CLARiiON and Celerra compression

    Dedupe in various hardware and software solutions, source and target, compression with Storwize

    Dedupe via OEM VTLs and other sun solutions

    Data preservation

    Database and other archive tools, archive storage

    OEM solutions from EMC and others

    Centera and other solutions

    Various hardware and software solutions

    Various hardware and software solutions

    General data protection (excluding logical or physical security and DLP)

    Internal Data Protector software plus OEM, partners with other software, various VTL, TL and target solutions as well as services

    OEM and resell partner tools as well as Dell target devices and those of partners. Could this be a future acquisition target area?

    Networker and Avamar software, Datadomain and other targets, DPA management tools and Mozy services

    Tivoli suite of software and various hardware targets, management tools and cloud services

    Various software and partners tools, tape libraries, VTLs and online storage solutions

    Scale out, bulk, or clustered NAS

    eXtreme scale out, bulk and clustered storage for unstructured data applications

    Exanet on Dell servers with shared SAS, iSCSI or FC storage

    Celerra and ATMOS

    IBM SONAS or N series (OEM from NetApp)

    ZFS based solutions including 7000 series

    General purpose NAS

    Various gateways for EVA or MSA or XP, HP IBRIX or Polyserve based as well as Microsoft WSS solutions

    EMC Celerra, Dell Exanet, Microsoft WSS based. Acquisition or partner target area?

    Celerra

    N Series OEMed from Netapp as well as growing awareness of SONAS

    ZFS based solutions. Whatever happened to Procom?

    Mid market multi protocol block

    EVA (FC with iSCSI or NAS gateways), LeftHand (P Series iSCSI) for lowered of this market

    3PAR (FC and iSCSI, NAS with gateway) for mid to upper end of this market, EqualLogic (iSCSI) for the lower end of the market, some residual EMC CX activity phases out over time?

    CLARiiON (FC and iSCSI with NAS via gateway), Some smaller DMX or VMAX configurations for mid to upper end of this market

    DS5000, DS4000 (FC and iSCSI with NAS via a gateway) both OEMed from LSI, XIV and N series (Netapp)

    7000 series (ZFS and Sun storage software running on Sun server with internal storage, optional external storage)

    6000 series

    Scalable SMB iSCSI

    LeftHand (P Series)

    EqualLogic

    Celerra NX, CLARiiON AX/CX

    XIV, DS3000, N Series

    2000
    7000

    Entry level shared block

    MSA2000 (iSCSI, FC, SAS)

    MD3000 (iSCSI, FC, SAS)

    AX (iSCSI, FC)

    DS3000 (iSCSI, FC, SAS), N Series (iSCSI, FC, NAS)

    2000
    7000

    Entry level unified multi function

    X (not to be confused with eXtreme series) HP servers with Windows Storage Software

    Dell servers with Windows Storage Software or EMC Celerra

    Celerra NX, Iomega

    xSeries servers with Microsoft or other software installed

    ZFS based solutions running on Sun servers

    Low end SOHO

    X (not to be confused with eXtreme series) HP servers with Windows Storage Software

    Dell servers with storage and Windows Storage Software. Future acqustion area perhaps?

    Iomega

     

     

    Table 1: Sampling of various tiers, architectures, functionality and storage solution options

    Clarifying some of the above categories in table 1:

    Servers: Application servers or computers running Windows, Linux, HyperV, VMware or other applications, operating systems and hypervisors.

    Services: Professional and consulting services, installation, break fix repair, call center, hosting, managed services or cloud solutions

    Enterprise storage: Large scale (hundreds to thousands of drives, many front end as well as back ports, multiple controllers or storage processing engines (nodes), large amount of cache and equally strong performance, feature rich functionality, resilient and scalable.

    Data footprint impact reduction: Archive, data management, compression, dedupe, thin provision among other techniques. Read more here and here.

    Data preservation: Archiving for compliance and non regulatory applications or data including software, hardware, services.

    General data protection: Excluding physical or logical data security (firewalls, dlp, etc), this would be backup/restore with encryption, replication, snapshots, hardware and software to support BC, DR and normal business operations. Read more about data protection options for virtual and physical storage here.

    Scale out NAS: Clustered NAS, bulk unstructured storage, cloud storage system or file system. Read more about clustered storage here. HP has their eXtreme X series of scale out and bulk storage systems as well as gateways. These leverage IBRIX and Polyserve which were bought by HP as software, or as a solution (HP servers, storage and software), perhaps with optional data reduction software such as Ocarina OEMed by Dell. Dell now has Exanet which they bought recently as software, or as a solution running on Dell servers, with either SAS, iSCSI or FC back end storage plus optional data footprint reduction software such as Ocarina. IBM has GPFS as a software solution running on IBM or other vendors servers with attached storage, or as a solution such as SONAS with IBM servers running software with IBM DS mid range storage. IBM also OEMs Netapp as the N series.

    General purpose NAS: NAS (NFS and CIFS or optional AFP and pNFS) for everyday enterprise (or SME/SMB) file serving and sharing

    Mid market multi protocol block: For SMB to SME environments that need scalable shared (SAN) scalable block storage using iSCSI, FC or FCoE

    Scalable SMB iSCSI: For SMB to SME environments that need scalable iSCSI storage with feature rich functionality including built in virtualization

    Entry level shared block: Block storage with flexibility to support iSCSI, SAS or Fibre Channel with optional NAS support built in or available via a gateway. For example external SAS RAID shared storage between 2 or more servers configured in a HyeprV or VMware clustered that do not need or can afford higher cost of iSCSI. Another example would be shared SAS (or iSCSI or Fibre Channel) storage attached to a server running storage software such as clustered file system (e.g. Exanet) or VTL, Dedupe, Backup, Archiving or data footprint reduction tools or perhaps database software where higher cost or complexity of an iSCSI or Fibre Channel SAN is not needed. Read more about external shared SAS here.

    Entry level unified multifunction: This is storage that can do block and file yet is scaled down to meet ease of acquisition, ease of sale, channel friendly, simplified deployment and installation yet affordable for SMBs or larger SOHOs as well as ROBOs.

    Low end SOHO: Storage that can scale down to consumer, prosumer or lower end of SMB (e.g. SOHO) providing mix of block and file, yet priced and positioned below higher price multifunction systems.

    Wait a minute, are that too many different categories or types of storage?

    Perhaps, however it also enables multiple tools (tiers of technologies) to be in a vendors tool box, or, in an IT professionals tool bin to address different challenges. Lets come back to this in a few moments.

     

    Some Industry trends and perspectives (ITP) thoughts:

    How can Dell with 3PAR be an enterprise play without IBM mainframe FICON support?
    Some would say forget about it, mainframes are dead thus not a Dell objective even though EMC, HDS and IBM sell a ton of storage into those environments. However, fair enough argument and one that 3PAR has faced for years while competing with EMC, HDS, HP, IBM and Fujitsu thus they are versed in how to handle that discussion. Thus the 3PAR teams can help the Dell folks determine where to hunt and farm for business something that many of the Dell folks already know how to do. After all, today they have to flip the business to EMC or worse.

    If truly pressured and in need, Dell could continue reference sales with EMC for DMX and VMAX. Likewise they could also go to Bustech and/or Luminex who have open systems to mainframe gateways (including VTL support) under a custom or special solution sale. Ironically EMC has OEMed in the past Bustech to transform their high end storage into Mainframe VTLs (not to be confused with Falconstor or Quantum for open system) as well as Datadomain partnered with Luminex.

    BTW, did you know that Dell has had for several years a group or team that handles specialized storage solutions addressing needs outside the usual product portfolio?

    Thus IMHO Dells enterprise class focus will be that for open systems large scale out where they will compete with EMC DMX and VMAX, HDS USP or their soon to be announced enhancements, HP and their Hitachi Japan OEMed XP, IBM and the DS8000 as well as the seldom heard about yet equally scalable Fujitsu Eternus systems.

     

    Why only 1.15B, after all they paid 1.4B for EqualLogic?
    IMHO, had this deal occurred a couple of years ago when some valuations were still flying higher than today, and 3PAR were at their current sales run rate, customer deployment situations, it is possible the amount would have been higher, either way, this is still a great value for both Dell and 3PAR investors, customers, employees and partners.

     

    Does this mean Dell dumps EMC?
    Near term I do not think Dell dumps the EMC dudes (or dudettes) as there is still plenty of business in the mid market for the two companies. However, over time, I would expect that Dell will unleash the 3PAR folks into the space where normally a CLARiiON CX would have been positioned such as deals just above where EqualLogic plays, or where Fibre Channel is preferred. Likewise, I would expect Dell to empower the 3PAR team to go after additional higher end deals where a DMX or VMAX would have been the previous option not to mention where 3PAR has had success.

    This would also mean extending into sales against HP EVA and XPs, IBM DS5000 and DS8000 as well as XIV, Oracle/Sun 6000 and 7000s to name a few. In other words there will be some spin around coopition, however longer term you can read the writing on the wall. Oh, btw, lest you forget, Dell is first and foremost a server company who now is getting into storage in a much bigger way and EMC is first and foremost a storage company who is getting into severs via VMware as well as their Cisco partnerships.

    Are shots being fired across each other bows? I will leave that up to you to speculate.

     

    Does this mean Dell MD1000/MD3000 iSCSI, SAS and FC disappears?
    I do not think so as they have had a specific role for entry level below where the EqualLogic iSCSI only solution fits providing mixed iSCSI, SAS and Fibre Channel capabilities to compete with the HP MSA2000 (OEMed by Dothill) and IBM DS3000 (OEMed from LSI). While 3PAR could be taken down into some of these markets, which would also potentially dilute the brand and thus premium margin of those solutions.

    Likewise, there is a play with server vendors to attach shared SAS external storage to small 2 and 4 node clusters for VMware, HyperV, Exchange, SQL, SharePoint and other applications where iSCSI or Fibre Channel are to expensive or not needed or where NAS is not a fit. Another play for the shared external SAS attached is for attaching low cost storage to scale out clustered NAS or bulk storage where software such as Exanet runs on a Dell server. Take a closer look at how HP is supporting their scale out as well as IBM and Oracle among others. Sure you can find iSCSI or Fibre Channel or even NAS back end to file servers. However growing trend of using shared SAS.

     

    Does Dell now have too many different storage systems and solutions in their portfolio?
    Possibly depending upon how you look at it and certainly the potential is there for revenue prevention teams to get in the way of each other instead of competing with external competitors. However if you compare the Dell lineup with those of EMC, HP, IBM and Oracle/Sun among others, it is not all that different. Note that HP, IBM and Oracle also have something in common with Dell in that they are general IT resource providers (servers, storage, networks, services, hardware and software) as compared to other traditional storage vendors.

    Consequently if you look at these vendors in terms of their different markets from consumer to prosumer to SOHO at the low end of the SMB to SME that sits between SMB and enterprise, they have diverse customer needs. Likewise, if you look at these vendors server offerings, they too are diverse ranging from desktops to floor standing towers to racks, high density racks and blade servers that also need various tiers, architectures, price bands and purposed storage functionality.

     

    What will be key for Dell to make this all work?
    The key for Dell will be similar to that of their competitors which is to clearly communicate the value proposition of the various products or solutions, where, who and what their target markets are and then execute on those plans. There will be overlap and conflict despite the best spin as is always the case with diverse portfolios by vendors.

    However if Dell can keep their teams focused on expanding their customer footprints at the expense of their external competition vs. cannibalizing their own internal product lines, not to mention creating or extending into new markets or applications. Consequently Dell now has many tools in their tool box and thus need to educate their solution teams on what to use or sell when, where, why and how instead of just having one tool or a singular focus. In other words, while a great solution, Dell no longer has to respond with the solution to everything is iSCSI based EqualLogic.

    Likewise Dell can leverage the same emotion and momentum behind the EqualLogic teams to invigorate and unleash the best with 3PAR teams and solution into or onto the higher end of the SMB, SME and enterprise environments.

    Im still thinking that Exanet is a diamond in the rough for Dell where they can install the clustered scalable NAS software onto their servers and use either lower end shared SAS RAID (e.g. MD3000), or iSCSI (MD3000, EqualLogic or 3PAR) or higher end Fibre Channel with 3PAR) for scale out, cloud and other bulk solutions competing with HP, Oracle and IBM. Dell still has the Windows based storage server for entry level multi protocol block and file capabilities as well as what they OEM from EMC.

     

    Is Dell done shopping?
    IMHO I do not think so as there are still areas where Dell can extend their portfolio and not just in storage. Likewise there are still some opportunities or perhaps bargains out there for fall and beyond acquisitions.

     

    Does this mean that Dell is not happy with EqualLogic and iSCSI
    Simply put from my perspective talking with Dell customers, prospects, and partners and seeing them all in action nothing could be further from Dell not being happy with iSCSI or EqualLogic. Look at this as being a way to extend the Dell story and capabilities into new markets, granted the EqualLogic folks now have a new sibling to compete with internal marketing and management for love and attention.

     

    Isnt Dell just an iSCSI focused company?
    A couple of years I was quoted in one of the financial analysis reports as saying that Dell needed to remain open to various forms of storage instead of becoming singularly focused on just iSCSI as a result of the EqualLogic deal. I standby that statement in that Dell to be a strong enterprise contender needs to have a balanced portfolio across different price or market bands, from block to file, from shared SAS to iSCSI to Fibre Channel and emerging FCoE.

    This also means supporting traditional NAS across those different price band or market sectors as well as support for emerging and fast growing unstructured data markets where there is a need for scale out and bulk storage. Thus it is great to see Dell remaining open minded and not becoming singularly focused on just iSCSI instead providing the right solution to meet their diverse customer as well as prospect needs or opportunities.

    While EqualLogic was and is a very successfully iSCSI focused storage solution not to mention one that Dell continues to leverage, Dell is more than just iSCSI. Take a look at Dells current storage line up as well as up in table 1 and there is a lot of existing diversity. Granted some of that current diversity is via partners which the 3PAR deal helps to address. What this means is that iSCSI continues to grow in popularity however there are other needs where shared SAS or Fibre Channel or FCoE will be needed opening new markets to Dell.

     

    Bottom line and wrap up (for now)
    This is a great move for Dell (as well as 3PAR) to move up market in the storage space with less reliance on EMC. Assuming that Dell can communicate the what to use when, where, why and how to both their internal teams, partners as well as industry and customers not to mention then execute on, they should have themselves a winner.

    Will this deal end up being an even better bargain than when Dell paid $1.4B for EqualLogic?

    Not sure yet, it certainly has potential if Dell can execute on their plans without losing momentum in any other their other areas (products).

    Whats your take?

    Cheers gs

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

    Here are some related links to read more

    Data footprint reduction (Part 2): Dell, IBM, Ocarina and Storwize

    Dell

    IBM

    Over the past couple of weeks there has been a flurry of IT industry activity around data footprint impact reduction with Dell buying Ocarina and IBM acquiring Storwize. For those who want the quick (compacted, reduced) synopsis of what Dell buying Ocarina as well as IBM acquiring Storwize means read the first post in this two part series as well as some of my comments here and here.

    This piece and it companion in part I of this two part series is about expanding the discussion to the much larger opportunity for vendors or vars of overall data footprint impact reduction beyond where they are currently focused. Likewise, this is about IT customers realizing that there are more opportunities to address data and storage optimization across your entire organization using various techniques instead of just focusing on backup or vmware virtual servers.

    Who is Ocarina and Storwize?
    Ocarina is a data and storage management software startup focused on data footprint reduction using a variety of approaches, techniques and algorithms. They differ from the traditional data dedupers (e.g. Asigra, Bakbone, Commvault, EMC Avamar, Datadomain and Networker, Exagrid, Falconstor, HP, IBM Protectier and TSM, Quantum, Sepaton and Symantec among others) by looking at data footprint reduction beyond just backup.

    This means looking at how to reduce data footprint across different types of data including videos, image as well as text based documents among others. As a result, the market sweet spot for Ocarina is for general data footprint reduction including static along with active data including entertainment, video surveillance or gaming, reference data, web 2.0 and other bulk storage application data needs (this should compliment Dells recent Exanet acquisition).

    What this means is that Ocarina is very well suited to address the rapidly growing amount of unstructured data that may not otherwise be handled as efficiently with by dedupe alone.

    Storwize is a data and storage management startup focused on data footprint reduction using inline compression with an emphasis on maintaining performance for reads as well as writes of unstructured as well as structured database data. Consequently the market sweet spot for Storwize is around boosting the capacity of existing NAS storage systems from different vendors without negatively impacting performance. The trade off of the Storwize approach is that you do not get the spectacular data reduction ratios associated with backup centric or focused dedupe, however, you maintain performance associated with online storage that some dedupers dream of.

    Both Dell and IBM have existing dedupe solutions for general purpose as well as backup along with other data footprint impact reduction tools (either owned or via partners). Now they are both expanding their focus and reach similar to what others such as EMC, HP, NetApp, Oracle and Symantec among others are doing. What this means is that someone at Dell and IBM see that there is much more to data footprint impact reduction than just a focus on dedupe for backup.

    Wait, what does all of this discussion (or read here for background issues, challenges and opportunities) about unstructured data and changing access lifecycles have to do with dedupe, Ocarina and Storwize?

    Continue reading on as this is about the expanding opportunity for data footprint reduction across entire organizations. That is, more data is being kept online and expanding data footprint impact needs to be addressed to meet business objectives using various techniques balancing performance, availability, capacity and energy or economics (PACE).

    Dell

    IBM

    What does all of this have to do with IBM buying Storwize and Dell acquiring Ocarina?
    If you have not pieced this together yet, let me net it out.

    This is about the opportunity to address the organization wide expanding data footprint impact across all applications, types of data as well as tiers of storage to support business growth (more data to store) while maintaining QoS yet reduce per unit costs including management.

    This is about expanding the story to the broader data footprint impact reduction from the more narrowly focused backup and dedupe discussion which are still in their infancy on a relative basis to their full market potential (read more here).

    Now are you seeing where this is going and fits?

    Does this mean IBM and Dell defocus on their existing Dedupe product lines or partners?
    I do not believe so, at least as long as their respective revenue prevention departments are kept on the sidelines and off of the field of play. What I mean by this is that the challenge for IBM and Dell is similar to that of what others such as EMC are faced with having diverse portfolios or technology toolboxes. The challenge is messaging to the bigger issues, then aligning the right tool to the task at hand to address given issues and opportunities instead of singularly focused on a specific product causing revenue prevention elsewhere.

    As an example, for backup, I would expect Dell to continue to work with its existing dedupe backup centric partners and technologies however find new opportunities to leverage their Ocarina solution. Likewise, IBM I would expect to continue to show customers where Tivoli software based dedupe or Protectier (aka the deduper formerly known as Diligent) or other target based dedupe fits and expand into other data footprint impact areas with Storewize.

    Does this change the playing field?
    IMHO these moves as well as some previous moves by the likes of EMC and NetApp among others are examples of expanding the scope and dimension of the playing field. That is, the focus is much more than just dedupe for backup or of virtual machines (e.g. VMware vSphere or Microsoft HyperV).

    This signals a growing awareness around the much larger and broader opportunity around organization wide data footprint impact reduction. In the broader context some applications or data gets compressed either in application software such as databases, file systems, operating systems or even hypervisors as well as in networks using protocol or bandwidth optimizers as well as inline compression or post processing techniques as has been the case with streaming tape devices for some time.

    This also means that where with dedupe the primary focus or marketing angle up until recently has been around reduction ratios, to meet the needs of time or performance sensitive applications data transfer rates also become important.

    Hence the role of policy based data footprint reduction where the right tool or technique to meet specific service requirements is applied. For those vendors with a diverse data footprint impact reduction tool kit including archive, compression, dedupe, thin provision among other techniques, I would expect to hear expanded messaging around the theme of applying the right tool to the task at hand.

    Does this mean Dell bought Ocarina to accessorize EqualLogic?
    Perhaps, however that would then beg the question of why EqualLogic needs accessorizing. Granted there are many EqualLogic along with other Dell sold storage systems attached to Dell and other vendors servers operating as NFS or Windows CIFS file servers that are candidates for Ocarina. However there are also many environments that do not yet include Dell EqualLogic solutions where Ocarina is a means for Dell to extend their reach enabling those organizations to do more with what they have while supporting growth.

    In other words, Ocarina can be used to accessorize, or, it can be used to generate and create pull through for various Dell products. I also see a very strong affinity and opportunity for Dell to combine their recent Exanet NAS storage clustering software with Dell servers, storage to create bulk or scale out solutions similar to what HP and other vendors have done. Of course what Dell does with the Ocarina software over time, where they integrate it into their own products as well as OEM to others should be interesting to watch or speculate upon.

    Does this mean IBM bought Storwize to accessorize XIV?
    Well, I guess if you put a gateway (or software on a server which is the same thing) in front of XIV to transform it into a NAS system, sure, then Storwize could be used to increase the net usable capacity of the XIV installed base. However that is a lot of work and cost for what is on a relative basis a small footprint, yet it is a viable option never the less.

    IMHO IBM has much more of a play, perhaps a home run by walking before they run by placing Storwize in front of their existing large installed base of NetApp N series (not to mention targeting NetApps own install base) as well as complimenting their SONAS solutions. From there as IBM gets their legs and mojo, they could go on the attack by going after other vendors NAS solutions with an efficiency story similar to how IBM server groups target other vendors server business for takeout opportunities except in a complimenting manner.

    Longer term I would not be surprised to see IBM continue development of the block based IP (as well as file) in the storwize product for deployment in solutions ranging from SVC to their own or OEM based products along with articulating their comprehensive data footprint reduction solution portfolio. What will be important for IBM to do is articulating what solution to use when, where, why and how without confusing their customers, partners and rest of the industry (something that Dell will also have to do).

    Some links for additional reading on the above and related topics

    Wrap up (for now)

    Organizations of all shape and size are encountering some form of growing data footprint impact that currently, or soon will need to be addressed. Given that different applications and types of data along with associated storage mediums or tiers have various performance, availability, capacity, energy as well as economic characteristics multiple data footprint impact reduction tools or techniques are needed. What this all means is that the focus of data footprint reduction is expanding beyond that of just dedupe for backup or other early deployment scenarios.

    Note what this means is that dedupe has an even brighter future than where it currently is focused which is still only scratching the surface of potential market adoption as was discussed in part 1 of this series.

    However this also means that dedupe is not the only solution to all data footprint reduction scenarios. Other techniques including archiving, compression, data management, thin provisioning, data deletion, tiered storage and consolidation will start to gain respect, coverage discussions and debates.

    Bottom line, use the most applicable technologies or combinations along with best practice for the task and activity at hand.

    For some applications reduction ratios are an important focus on the tools or modes of operations that achieve those results.

    Likewise for other applications where the focus is on performance with some data reduction benefit, tools are optimized for performance first and reduction secondary.

    Thus I expect messaging from some vendors to adjust (expand) to those capabilities that they have in their toolboxes (product portfolios) offerings

    Consequently, IMHO some of the backup centric dedupe solutions may find themselves in niche roles in the future unless they can diversity. Vendors with multiple data footprint reduction tools will also do better than those with only a single function or focused tool.

    However for those who only have a single or perhaps a couple of tools, well, guess what the approach and messaging will be. After all, if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail, if all you have is a screw driver, well, you get the picture.

    On the other hand, if you are still not clear on what all this means, send me a note, give a call, post a comment or a tweet and will be happy to discuss with you.

    Oh, FWIW, if interested, disclosure: Storwize was a client a couple of years ago.

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Two companies on parallel tracks moving like trains offset by time: EMC and NetApp

    View from VIA Rail Canada taken using Gregs iFlip

    I see some similarities and parallels between two competing companies. Those companies happen to be in the same sector (e.g. IT data storage) however offset by time (about a decade or) subject to continued execution by both.

    Those two companies are EMC and NetApp.

    Some people might assert that these two companies are complete opposites. Perhaps claiming that one is on the up swing while the other on the down path (have heard claims and counter claims of both being on the other path). I will leave the discussion or debate of which is on the up and which is on the down path to the twittervile and blogsphere ultimate tag team mud wrestling arena or You Tube video rooms.

    I see EMC and NetApp a bit differently which you can take it for what that is, simply an opinion or perspective having been the competitor and partner of both when I was on the vendor side of the table and later covering the two as an industry analyst.

    Without going too far down the memory lane route, in a nut shell, I recall when EMC was still a fledgling startup who wanted to sell me (I was on the customer side then) rebrand Fujitsu disk drives to attach to my VAX/VMS systems and memory for our mainframes. Come to think about it, Emulex was also selling disk drives back then before reinventing themselves later as an HBA and hub vendor.

    Later as a vendor, around late 94 or early 95, it was the up and coming small little bay area NAS filer appliance vendor (e.g. the toaster era) that we partnered with including a very brief OEM deal involving repackaging their product which was NetApp or Network Appliance as they were formerly known then. Once that ended after a year or so NetApp become a competitor as was EMC who at the time had as the main act the Symmetrix and about to do the EPOCH backup and McData acquisitions as well as landing the HP OEM deal for open systems.

    Ironically NetApp was out to knock off Auspex which happened fairly quickly while EMC was struggling to get its NAS act together with the early DART behemoth while successfully knocking out IBM and other entrenched high-end solutions. In a twist of fate, the company I was working for ended up selling off all of their RAID (initially a few, then later all of them) patents to EMC for some cash and later transitioned out of the hardware business becoming simply a VAR of EMC (that was MTI).

    While at INRANGE which later merged into CNT before acquired by McData (I left before that) and then Brocade, both EMC and NetApp were partners across different product lines.

    What they have in common

    Ok, enough of the memory lane stuff; lets get back to where the similarities exist.

    Back in the mid 90s, EMC was essentially a one trick pony with a very software feature function rich large storage system that sold for a premium generating lots of cash from its use of cache. Likewise, NetApp is a vendor that while it has many product offerings and has some acquisitions, still relies very much on their flagship NAS storage systems that are also feature function (e.g. software) rich that leverage cache to generate cash.

    Both companies are growing in terms of revenues, installed base, partners/OEMs and product diversity. Likewise each company needs to continue expansion into those as well as other adjacent areas.

    Can NetApp catch EMC? Maybe, maybe not, however IMHO the question should be are there other areas that NetApp can extend its reach into causing EMC to react to those, like how EMC took advantage of opportunities causing IBM and others to react.

    Here are some other similarities I see of and for EMC and NetApp:

    • Both have great outreach programs where information is provided without having to ask or dig in a proactive way, yet when something is needed, they give it without fanfare
    • Both are engaging at multiple levels, from customer, to financial and investors, to var, to partner, trade groups, to trade and other media, to analysts to social networking and beyond
    • Both are passionate about their companies, cultures, products, solutions and customers
    • Both can walk the talk, however both also like to talk and see the other balk
    • Both lead by example and not afraid to tell you what they think about something
    • Both embrace social media in connection with traditional mediums for communication with people as opposed to a giant megaphone for talking at or spamming people (when will other vendors figure that out?)
    • Both also are willing to hear what you have to say even if they do not agree with it
    • Neither is scared of the other (or at least not in public)
    • Both cause the other to play and execute a stronger game
    • Both are not above throwing a mud ball or fire cracker at the other
    • Both are not above burying the hatchet and getting along when or where needed
    • Both compete vigorously on some fronts, yet partner (publicly or privately) on other fronts
    • Both have been direct focused with some vars and some OEMs
    • Both started somewhere else and now going and moving to different places and in some ways returning to their roots or at least making sure they are not forgotten
    • Both are synonymous with their core focus products and background
    • One comes from an open systems focus working to prove itself in the enterprise
    • One comes from the enterprise establishing itself in SOHO, SMB and other spaces
    • Both have many solutions, some would say long in the tooth, others would say revolutionary
    • Both are growing via organic growth as well as acquisition and partnering
    • Both have celebrity leaders and team role players to support and back then up
    • Both also have deep benches and technical folks in the trenches to get things done
    • Both have developed leadership along with rank and file employees internal
    • Both have gone outside and brought in leadership and skilled players to expand their employee ranks
    • Both are very much involved with server virtualization (Microsoft and VMware)
    • Both are very much involved in storage virtualization and associated management
    • Both are involved with cloud solutions for enabling public or private storage
    • Both are independent storage vendors not part of a larger server organization
    • Both have interoperability programs with other vendors servers and software and networks
    • Both also get beat up about their pricing models for extensive software feature function portfolios associated with respective storage solutions
    • Both get criticized by customers or the industry as is often the case of market leaders

    What I see EMC needing to do

    • Articulate where their multiple products and services fit and play into their different target market opportunities while worrying less about the color hue of logos or video backgrounds
    • Avoiding competing with itself or becoming its own major or main competitor
    • Clarify cloud (public and private) cloud confusion transitioning into cloud cash and opportunity
    • Minimize or cut channel contention and confusion internally and across partners
    • Remember where they came from and core competences however avoid a death grip on them
    • Look to the future, leverage lessons learned that helped EMC succeed where others failed
    • EMC needs NetApp as a strong NAS competitor as each plays stronger when against the other. This is like watching world-class athletes, artists or musicians that step up their games or works when paired with another

    What I see NTAP needing to do

    • Doing an acquisition in an adjacent space, perhaps even a reverse merger of sorts to move up and out into a broader space that compliments their core offerings. For example, something outside of the normal comfort zone which arguably Datadomain would have been close to their comfort zone. Likewise acquiring a software player such as Commvault would be similar to EMC having acquired Legato, Documentum and so forth. That is NetApp would have to do a series of those. So why not something really big like a reverse merger or partial acquisition of say Symantecs data protection and management group (aka the old Veritas suite including backup, management tools, clustered file server software, volume managers etc).
    • In addition to adjacent acquisition, opportunities plays such as the recent Bycast move makes sense however then those need to be integrated and rolled out similar to what EMC has done with so many of their purchases.
    • Minimize or cut channel contention and confusion both internal across products and with partners.
    • NetApp started at the lower end SMB, grew into the SME and now enterprise place, however they tried with the StorVault and backed out of that market leaving it to EMC Iomega, Cisco, HP, Dell and others. Maybe they do not need a low-end play, however I rather liked the low-end StorVault story as well as where it was going. Oh well, needless to say I ended up buying an EMC Iomega IX4 as the StorVault left the market. Hmm, does that mean NetApp should acquire SNAP or Drobo or some other low-end SOHO play? Only if the price is right and there is an existing customer base and channel in place otherwise it would be a distraction from the core business. BTW, did I mention EMC Legato, oh excuse me, Networker came from the desktop and SMB environment however grew to the enterprise (yes I know, that is debatable) however now is difficult to put into SOHO environments.
    • Does NetApp need a stronger block storage play, perhaps a 3PAR acquisition? Maybe, perhaps not depending on if they are competing for today’s market or tomorrows.
    • Does NetApp need to be acquired? I think they can stay independent; however they need to expand their presence and footprint from a product, partner and customer perspective.
    • NetApp needs a strong NAS competitor in the likes of an EMC as the competition IMHO makes each stronger as well as providing competition which should play well for customers. Not to mention the back and forth mud ball and fire cracker tossing can be entertaining for some.

    What is your take?

    Are EMC and NetApp two companies on parallel tracks offset by time and perhaps execution?

    Cast your vote and see what others have indicated in the following poll.

    View from VIA Rail Canada taken using Gregs iFlip

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

    Greg Schulz – Microsoft MVP Cloud and Data Center Management, vSAN and VMware vExpert. Author of Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials (CRC Press), as well as Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press), Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier) and twitter @storageio.

    All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2023 Server StorageIO(R) and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

    Post Holiday IT Shopping Bargains, Dell Buying Exanet?

    For consumers, the time leading up to the holiday Christmas season is usually busy including door busters as well as black Friday among other specials for purchasing gifts and other items. However savvy shoppers will wait for after Christmas or the holidays altogether perhaps well into the New Year when some good bargains can become available. IT customers are no different with budgets to use up before the end of the year thus a flurry of acquisitions that should become evident soon as we are entering earnings announcement season.

    However there are also bargains for IT organizations looking to take advantage of special vendor promotions trying to stimulate sales, not to mention for IT vendors to do some shopping of their own. Consequently, in addition to the flurry of merger and acquisition (M and A) activity from last summer through the fall, there has been several recent deals, some of which might make Monty Hall blush!

    Some recent acquisition activity include among others:

    • Dell bought Perot systems for $3.9B
    • DotHill bought Cloverleaf
    • Texas Memory Systems (TMS) bought Incipient
    • HP bought IBRIX and 3COM among others
    • LSI bought Onstor
    • VMware bought Zimbra
    • Micron bought Numonyx
    • Exar bought Neterion

    Now the industry is abuzz about Dell, who is perhaps using some of the lose change left over from holiday sales as being in the process of acquiring Israeli clustered storage startup Exanet for about $12M USD. Compared to previous Dell acquisitions including EqualLogic in 2007 for about $1.4B or last years Perot deal in the $3.9B range, $12M is a bargain and would probably not even put a dent in the selling and marketing advertising budget let alone corporate cash coffers which as of their Q3-F10 balance sheet shows about $12.795B in cash.

    Who is Exanet and what is their product solution?
    Exanet is a small Israeli startup providing a clustered, scale out NAS file serving storage solution (Figure 1) that began shipping in 2003. The Exanet solution (ExaStore) can be either software based, or, as a package solution ExaStore software installed on standard x86 servers with external RAID storage arrays combining as a clustered NAS file server.

    Product features include global name space, distributed metadata, expandable file systems, virtual volumes, quotas, snapshots, file migration, replication, and virus scanning, and load balancing, NFS, CIFS and AFP. Exanet scales up to 1 Exabyte of storage capacity along with supporting large files and billions of file per cluster.

    The target market that Exanet pursues is large scale out NAS where performance (either small random or large sequential I/Os) along with capacity are required. Consequently, in the scale out, clustered NAS file serving space, competitors include IPM GPFS (SONAS), HP IBRIX or PolyServe, Sun Lustre and Symantec SFS among others.

    Clustered Storage Model: Source The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC)
    Figure 1 Generic clustered storage model (Courtesy The Green and Virtual Data Center(CRC)

    For a turnkey solution, Exanet packaged their cluster file system software with various vendors storage combined with 3rd party external Fibre Channel or other storage. This should play well for Dell who can package the Exanet software on its own servers as well as leverage either SAS or Fibre Channel  MD1000/MD3000 external RAID storage among other options (see more below).

    Click here to learn more about clustered storage including clustered NAS, clustered and parallel file systems.

    Dell

    Whats the dell play?

    • Its an opportunity to acquire some intellectual property (IP)
    • Its an opportunity to have IP similar to EMC, HP, IBM, NetApp, Oracle and Symantec among others
    • Its an opportunity to address a market gap or need
    • Its an opportunity to sell more Dell servers, storage and services
    • Its an opportunity time for doing acquisitions (bargain shopping)

    Note: IBM also this past week announced their new bundled scale out clustered NAS file serving solution based on GPFS called SONAS. HP has IBRIX in addition to their previous PolyServe acquisition, Sun has ZFS and Lustre.

    How does Exanet fit into the Dell lineup?

    • Dell sells Microsoft based NAS as NX series
    • Dell has an OEM relationship with EMC
    • Dell was OEMing or reselling IBRIX in the past for certain applications or environments
    • Dell has needed to expand its NAS story to balance its iSCSI centric storage story as well as compliment its multifunction block storage solutions (e.g. MD3000) and server solutions.

    Why Exanet?
    Why Exanet, why not one of the other startups or small NAS or cloud file system vendors including BlueArc, Isilon, Panasas, Parascale, Reldata, OpenE or Zetta among others?

    My take is that probably because those were either not relevant to what Dell is looking for, lack of seamless technology and business fit, technology tied to non Dell hardware, technology maturity, the investors are still expecting a premium valuation, or, some combination of the preceding.

    Additional thoughts on why Exanet
    I think that Dell simply saw an opportunity to acquire some intellectual property (IP) probably including a patent or two. The value of the patents could be in the form of current or future product offerings, perhaps a negotiating tool, or if nothing else as marketing tool. As a marketing tool, Dell via their EqualLogic acquisition among others has been able to demonstrate and generate awareness that they actually own some IP vs. OEM or resell those from others. I also think that this is an opportunity to either fill or supplement a solution offering that IBRIX provided to high performance, bulk storage and scale out file serving needs.

    NAS and file serving supporting unstructured data are a strong growth market for commercial, high performance, specialized or research as well as small business environments. Thus, where EqualLogic plays to the iSCSI block theme, Dell needs to expand their NAS and file serving solutions to provide product diversity to meet various customer applications needs similar to what they do with block based storage. For example, while iSCSI based EqualLogic PS systems get the bulk of the marketing attention, Dell also has a robust business around the PowerVault MD1000/MD3000 (SAS/iSCSI/FC) and Microsoft multi protocol based PowerVault NX series not to mention their EMC CLARiiON based OEM solutions (E.g. Dell AX, Dell/EMC CX).

    Thus, Dell can complement the Microsoft multi protocol (block and NAS file) NX with a packaged (Dell servers and MD (or other affordable block storage) powered with Exanet) solution. While it is possible that Dell will find a way to package Exanet as a NAS gateway in front of the iSCSI based EqualLogic PS systems, which would also make for an expensive scale out NAS solution compared to those from other vendors.

    Thats it for now.

    Lets see how this all plays out.

    Cheers gs

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

    Technorati tags: Dell

    StorageIO aka Greg Schulz appears on Infosmack

    If you are in the IT industry, and specifically have any interest or tie to data infrastructures from servers, to storage and networking including hardware, software, services not to mention virtualization and clouds, InfoSmack and Storage Monkeys should be on your read or listen list.

    Recently I was invited to be a guest on the InfoSmack podcast which is about a 50 some minute talk show format around storage, networking, virtualization and related topics.

    The topics discussed include Sun and Oracle from a storage standpoint, Solid State Disk (SSD) among others.

    Now, a word of caution, InfoSmack is not your typical prim and proper venue, nor is it a low class trash talking production.

    Its fun and informative where the hosts and attendees are not afraid of poking fun at them selves while exploring topics and the story behind the story in a candid non scripted manner.

    Check it out.

    Cheers – gs

    Greg Schulz – StorageIOblog, twitter @storageio Author “The Green and Virtual Data Center” (CRC)

    Summer Weddings: EMC+Datadomain and HP+IBRIX

    Storage I/O trends

    Are you friend or family of the bride or groom?

    Here’s comes the bride! (Audio)

    That’s a question me and Mrs. Schulz were asked recently when we attended a wedding.

    Summer months particularly June and August are known as wedding months (Hmmm, more merger & acquisition activity to come?). Summer is a nice time of the year for marriages at least in the U.S. and how ironic that we have already seen two well publicized IT data storage industry unions in the past couple of weeks, not to mention other smaller less publicized ones.

    In one case, the California based bride (Datadomain-DDUP) had two courtiers (Massachusetts based EMC and California based NetApp, plus rumors of others). Fortunately one of those had a prenuptial that earned them a cool $57 million for their efforts (NetApp-NTAP) when EMC won the bride. Read more including some of my comments and perspectives among others about EMC, NTAP and DDUP here and here.

    Yesterday, on a mid-July Friday, when things are normally quiet, in true wedding industry forum, news was released (here and here) that California based HP announced that it had bought Massachusetts based data and storage management software vendor IBRIX.

    That’s a lot of activity involving California and Massachusetts in the past couple of weeks, not to mention the tornado sightings in the vicinity of EMCs Hopington Massachusetts headquarters coincidently around the same time the marriage to DDUP was formerly announced! What’s’ next, Aerosmith is out on tour, perhaps the Del Fuegos or Boston will perform at one of these wedding parties?

    Within the data storage industry, publicly traded Datadomain (DDUP) is fairly well known to many for their role in helping to popularize the data footprint impact reduction technique refereed to as de-duplication (e.g. normalization, commonality factoring, intelligent compression, etc.). Adding to the awareness of DDUP was the recent highly public courtship with EMC eventually out-bidding NTAP with a dowry of about $2.1B USD. That type of press coverage and monetary amounts might normally be expected for the likes of a Madonna, Brittney Spears, Michael Jackson-RIP, Paris Hilton, Elizabeth Taylor or other celebrity unions covered by paparazzi with a similar number of attorneys involved.

    On the other hand, IBRIX while known to some, is a lessor known entity compared to DDUP having taken a lower profile than even some of their close competitors. However for those who have been following and covering the clustered storage market (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here ), IBRIX is a well known entity.

    IBRIX also has had ties to EMC having been involved in a pre-mari age affair with an reseller arrangement along with being "rumored" ;) to have been involved with ATMOS cloud or policy based storage solution formerly known as "Hulk". IBRIX has also quietly been involved with others like Dell as well as HP in similar to EMC reseller arrangements. Where IBRIX has been positioned is to address high performance, scale out parallel or concurrent clustered file system needs, both big and small I/O, sequential and random data storage and access. For example, in the media/entertainment and other industries along with enabling large Internet providers a bulk (low cost, high capacity) scale-out NAS (NFS & CIFS) option.

    One of the reasons that IBRIX has been involved with the likes of EMC, Dell and HP among others is that unlike other vendors such as BlueArc, the once high-flying Isilon, NetApp, Onstor or Panasas, not to mention EMC Cellera NAS , is that those solutions are all bundled with proprietary hardware while IBRIX is software based. Where IBRIX Fusion fits is to enable NAS storage solutions using industry standard hardware (servers and storage) that are capable of being configured for both high performance compute (HPC) along with for low-cost general purpose bulk storage to support Web 2.0, social networking, home directories or on-line archives.

    Consequently, and HP or Dell who just happen to sell servers, have had the ability of meeting large scale out and scale up NAS file serving applications by re-selling IBRIX installed on their servers or blade servers with either their own entry to mid-range lower cost, high performance and high capacity storage along with that of 3rd party vendors.

    Ironically one of IBRIX’s competitors in the software NAS solution market was and remains PolyServe, software that HP acquired a couple of years ago to create their own scale out NAS solution (e.g. EFS). Other software based solutions include among others Lustre (Sun), CXFS (SGI), EMC ATMOS (I’m sure some will argue this is not scale out or NAS, will leave it at that for now) ;) not to mention those from IBM, Microsoft, Quantum (also re-sold by HP) or Symantec.

    What does HP get with IBRIX?

    Simple, the ability to own the IP (intellectual proprietary) that one of their competitors had been "rumored" to have been working with at one point, IP that their competitors had been reselling like themselves.

    Thus HP gets more software IP that can and has been sold along with their hardware such as the Proliant servers and blade servers giving their customers choice, similar to what HP and other vendors do with their open servers. For example, HP had the ExDS9000 extreme storage system built on a blade server with high density, low cost, high capacity HP storage (e.g. HP Modular Disk System 600, HP MSA or even EVA).

    This makes for a nice solution for bulk on-line and near-line storage applications where the emphasis is not as much on performance, rather massive scalability for storing on-line documents, archives, videos, images and other unstructured content which is where there is a lot of growth activity. The challenge is that the ExDS9x00 has only been available with the HP PolyServe software which works good for some environments, yet, for others, the clustered file system scale out capabilities of IBRIX were deployed.

    With the addition of IBRIX, HP now should be able to provide their customers and prospects the choice of software to meet specific needs while maintaining an HP footprint, that is both hardware, software and services. HP has several different storage software stacks that they now own (e.g. Lefthand for clustered iSCSI, PolyServe for NFS/CIFS NAS, IBRIX for Clustered File system scale out NAS) not to mention those that it OEMS including among others Bycast (Medical Archive System) that is also OEM’d by IBM as their Medical Grid combined with IBM SOFS, Quantum StorNext and Microsoft Windows Storage Server and Sepaton (VTL and Dedupe) to name a few.

    Do I think this was a good move by HP?

    Yes as it gives them control over IP that they had been reselling as had some of their competitors who left IBRIX to HP to grab up. HP now has the IP which they can package with their hardware similar to how they have been doing, and giving customers choices to align the right hardware and software technology to the task at hand.

    Whether it be Bycast for medical archiving, PolyServe or IBRIX for scale out NAS, Lefthand for clustered iSCSI, Sepaton for VTL and dedupe, Microsoft, Quantum StorNext for shared block storage serving or any of the other software packages HP offers with their industry standard servers, the customer has options.

    For IBRIX customers and prospects, this move will give them a boost in a confidence that their decisions and investments are safe.

    Ironically, vendors like Symantec with their Scaleable File Serving (SFS) clustered NAS solution that is also software based and runs on anyone’s open servers including those from HP gets a potential shot in the arm with HP validating the model and approach for bulk-storage and clustered NAS (Oh Mr. Salem, Mr. Dell is holding on Line 1, Mr. Chambers is on line 2 and Mr. Ellison on line 3 ;) )

    Who’s going to be at the alter next? IMHO, I would keep an eye on (and this all just pure speculation) Bycast, Symantec, EMLX (Broadcom was a wake up call), Quantum, Sepaton, STEC, StorMagic, or ACS, maybe even 3PAR among other possibilities (think outside of the lines). I would not rule out a major game changer such as someone buying NetApp or the likes of an HP buying an EMC or Oracle buying a CSC, maybe even a CSCO buying someone like NTAP, how about Oracle buying NTAP and putting some attorneys out of work, not to mention, who will MSFT hook up with? Anything is possible as we have seen and traditional M&A wisdom is out the window.

    Have fun at the next wedding you attend, go easy on the cake and wedding punch, especially if you will be doing any dancing (please, no You tube videos of the chicken dance) and be careful throwing rice or other items.

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Cisco wins FCoE Pre-Season and Primaries – Now for the Main Event!

    Storage I/O trends

    Ok, unless you have turned off all of your news feeds, RSS feeds, discontinued all printed industry and trade related publications and stopped visiting blogs and other on-line venues, you may not have heard that Cisco, NetApp, EMC, Emulex and Qlogic have made a series of announcements signaling proof of life for the emerging Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) based on the Cisco Data Center Ethernet (DCE) or on the emerging more general Converged Enhanced Ethernet (CEE).

    Now if you have not heard, check out the various industry news and information venues and blogs. Likewise if you are a Brocadian, dont worry and do not get upset by the early poll or exit poll results from the primaries, the real and broad adoption game has not started yet, however, get your game faces on.

    At this point given the newness of the technology and early adopter status, its safe to say that Cisco has won the pre-season or primaries for the first FCoE battle. However, despite the hype and proof of life activity which can be gauged by the counter claims from the iSCSI camps, the main event or real market adoption and deployment will start ramping up in 2009 and with broader adoption occurring in the 2010 to 2011 timeframes.

    This is not to say that there will not be any adoption of FCoE between now and the next 12-18 months, quite the opposite, there will be plenty of early adopters, test and pilot cases as well as Cisco faithful who chose to go the FCoE route vs. another round of Fibre Channel at 8Gb, or, for those who want to go to FCoE at 10Gb instead of iSCSI or NAS at 10GbE for what ever reasons. However the core target market for FCoE is the higher-end, risk adverse environments that shy away from bleeding edge technology unless there is an adjacent and fully redundant blood bank located next door if not on-site.

    Consequently similar how Fibre Channel and FICON were slow to ramp-up taking a couple of years from first product and components availability, FCoE will continue to gain ground and as the complete and open ecosystem comes into place including adapters, switches and directors, routers, bridges and gateways, storage systems as well as management tools and associated training and skills development.

    Watch for vendors to ratchet up discussions about how many FCoE or FCoE enabled systems are shipped with an eye on the keyword, FCoE enabled which means that the systems may or may not actually be deployed in FCoE mode, rather that they are ready for it, sound familiar to early iSCSI or event FC product shipments?

    Rest assured, FCoE has a very bright future (see here and here) at the mid to high-end of the market while iSCSI will continue to grow and gain in adoption in the mid-market down to the lower reaches of the SMB market. Of course there will be border skirmishes as iSCSI tries to move up market and FCoE tries to move down market and of course there will be those that stay the course for another round of Fibre Channel beyond 8Gb while NAS continues to gain ground in all market segments and SAS at the very low-end where even iSCSI is to expensive. Learn more over at the Fibre Channel Industry Association (FCIA) or FCoE Portal sites as well as at Brocade, Cisco, EMC, Emulex, NetApp and Qlogic sites among others.

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Why XIV is so important to IBMs storage business – Its Not About the Technology or Product!

    Storage I/O trends

    Ok, so I know I’m not taking a popular stance on this one from both camps, the IBMers and their faithful followers as well as the growing legion of XIV followers will take exception I’m sure.

    Likewise, the nay sayers would argue why not take a real swing and knock the ball out of the park as if it were baseball batting practice. No, I’m going a different route as actually, either of the approaches would be too easy and have been pretty well addressed already.

    The IBM XIV product that IBM acquired back in January 2008 is getting a lot of buzz (some good, some not so good) lately in the media and blog sphere (here and here which in turn lead to many others) as well as in various industry and customer discussions.

    How ironic that the 2008 version of storage in an election year in the U.S. pits the IBM and XIV faithful in one camp and the nay sayers and competition in the other camps. To hear both camps go at it with points, counter points, mud-slinging and lipstick slurs should be of no surprise when it comes vendor?s points and counter points. In fact the only thing missing from some of the discussions or excuse me, debates is the impromptu appearance on-stage by either Senators Bidden, Clinton, McCain or Obama or Governor Palin to weigh in on the issues, after all, it is the 2008 edition of storage in an election year here in the United States.

    Rather than jump on the bashing XIV bandwagon which about everyone in the industry is now doing except for, the proponents or, folks taking a step back looking at the bigger non-partisan picture like Steve Duplessie the genesis billionaire founder of ESG and probably the future owner of the New England Patriots (American) Football team whose valuation may have dripped enough for Steve to buy now that their start quarterback Tom Brady is out with a leg injury that will take longer to rebuild than all the RAID 6 configured 1 TByte SATA disk drives in 3PAR, Dell, EMC, HGST, HP, IBM, NetApp, Seagate, Sun and Western Digital as well as many other vendors test labs combined. As for the proponents or faithful, in the spirit of providing freedom of choice and flexible options, the cool-aid comes in both XIV orange as well as traditional IBM XIV blue, nuff said.

    In my opinion, which is just that, an opinion, XIV is going to help and may have already done so for IBMs storage business not from the technical architecture or product capabilities or even in the number of units that IBM might eventually sell bundled or un-bundled. Rather, XIV is getting IBM exposure and coverage to be able to sit at the table with some re-invigorated spirit to tell the customer what IBM is doing and if they pay attention, in-between slide decks, grasp the orders for upgrades, expansion or new installs for the existing IBM storage product line, then continue on with their pitch until the customer asks to place another upgraded or expansion order, then quickly grab that order, then continue on with the presentation while touching lightly on the products IBM customers continue to buy and looking to upgrade including:

    IBM disk
    IBM tape – tape and virtual tape
    DS8000 – Mainframe and open systems storage
    DS5000 – New version of DS4000 to compete with new EMC CLARiiON CX4s
    DS4000 ? aka the Array formerly known as the FastT
    DS3000 – Entry level iSCSI, SAS and FC storage
    NetApp based N-Series – For NAS windows CIFS and NFS file sharing
    DR550 archiving solution
    SAN Volume Controller-SVC

    Not to mention other niche products such as the Data Direct Networks-DDN based DCS9550 or IBM developed DS6000 or recently acquired Diligent VTL and de-duping software.

    IBM will be successful with XIV not by how many systems they sell or give away, oh, excuse me, add value to other solutions. How IBM should be gauging XIV success is based on increased sales of their other storage systems and associated software and networking technologies including the mainframe attachable DS8000, the new high performance midrange DS5000 that builds on the success of the DS4000, all of which should have both Brocade and Cisco salivating given their performance need for more Fibre Channel (and FICON for DS8000) 4GFC and 8GFC Fibre Channel ports, switches, adapters and directors. Then there is the netapp based N series for NAS and file serving to support unstructured data including Web and social networking.

    If I were Brocade, Cisco, NetApp or any of the other many IBM suppliers, I would be putting solution bundles together certainly to ride the XIV wave, however have solution bundles ready to play to the collateral impact of all the other IBM storage products getting coverage. For example sure Brocade and Cisco will want to talk about more Fibre Channel and iSCSI switch ports for the XIV, however, also talk performance to be able to unleash the capabilities of the DS8000 and DS5000, or, file management tools for the N-Series as well as bundles around the archiving DR550 solution.

    The N-Series NAS gateway that could be used in theory to dress up XIV and actually make it usable for NAS file serving, file sharing and Web 2.0 related applications or unstructured data. There is the IBM SAN Volume Controller-SVC that virtualizes almost everything except the kitchen sink which may be in a future release. There is the DR550 archiving and compliance platform that not only provides RAID 6 protected energy-efficient storage, it also supports movement of data to tape, now if IBM could get the story out on that solution which maybe in the course of talking about XIV, IBM DR550 might get discovered as well. Of course there are all the other backup, archiving, data protection management and associated tools that will get pick-up and traction as well.

    You see even if IBM quadruples the XIV footprint of revenue installed in production systems with 400% growth rates year over year, never mind that the nay-sayers that would only be about 1/20 or 1/50th of what Dell/EqualLogic, or LeftHand via HP/Intel or even IBM xseries not to mention all the others using IBRIX, HP/PolyServe, Isilon, 3PAR, Panasas, Permabit, NEC and the list goes on with similar clustered solutions have already done.

    The point is watch for up-tick even if only 10% on the installed DS8000 or DS5000 (new) or DS4000 or DS3000 or N-Series (NetApp) or DR550 (the archive appliance IBM should talk more about), or SVC or the TS series VTLs.

    Even a 1% jump due to IBM folks getting out and in front of customers and business partners, a 10% jump on the installed based of somewhere around 40,000 DS8000 (and earlier ESS versions) is 4,000 new systems, on the combined DS5000/DS4000/DS3000 formerly known as FasT with combined footprint of over 100,000 systems in the field, 10% would be 10,000 new systems. Take the SVC, with about 3,000 instances (or about 11,000 clustered nodes), 10% would mean another new 300 instances and continue this sort of improvement across the rest of the line and IBM will have paid for not only XIV and Moshe?s (former EMCer and founded of XIV and now IBM fellow) retirement fund.

    IBM may be laughing to the big blue bank even after having enough money to finally buy a clustered NAS file system for Web 2.0 and bulk storage such as IBRIX before someone else like Dell, EMC or HP gets their hands on it. So while everyone else continues to bash how bad XIV is performing. Whether this is a by design strategy or one that IBM can simply fall into, it could be brilliant if played out and well executed however only time will tell.

    If those who want to rip on xiv really want to inflict damage, cease and ignore XIV for what it is or is not and find something else to talk about and rest assured, if there are other good stories, they will get covered and xiv will be ignored.

    Instead of ripping on XIV, or listening to more XIV hype, I’m going fishing and maybe will come back with a fish story to rival the XIV hype, in the meantime, look I forward to seeing the IBM success for their storage business as a whole due to the opportunity for IBMers and their partners getting excited to go and talk about storage and being surprised by their customers giving them orders for other IBM products, that is unless the IBM revenue prevention department gets in the way. For example if IBMers or their partners in the excitement of the XIV moment forget to sell to customers what customers want, and will buy today or are ready to buy and grab the low hanging fruit (sales orders for upgrades and new sales) of current and recently enhanced products while trying to reprogram and re-condition customers to the XIV story.

    Congratulations to IBM and their partners as well as OEM suppliers if they can collective pull the ruse off and actually stimulate total storage sales while XIV becomes a decoy and maybe even gets a few more installs and some revenue to help prop it up as a decoy.

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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

    Power, Cooling, Floor-space, Environmental (PCFE) and Green Metrics

    The Metrics and Measurement page on www.greendatastorage.com has been updated along with other pages covering IT data center PCFE and green topics for servers, storage, networks and facilities. Have a look.

    Ok, nuff said.

    Cheers gs

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

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