Tag: Performance

Posted on

NAD recommends Oracle discontinue certain Exadata performance claims

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

Oracle Exadata

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

Hmm, to quote Scooby Doo: Rut Roh!

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

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

The following is the press release that I received:

For Immediate Release
Contact: Linda Bean
212.705.0129

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In a NAD proceeding, the advertiser is obligated to support all reasonable interpretations of its advertising claims, not just the message it intended to convey.   In the absence of reliable consumer perception evidence, NAD uses its experienced judgment to determine what implied messages, if any, are conveyed by an advertisement.   When evaluating the message communicated by an advertising claim, NAD will examine the claims at issue in the context of the entire advertisement in which they appear.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

###

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

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

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

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

 

 

Linda Bean l Director, Communications,
Advertising Self-Regulatory Council

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

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

 

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

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

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

What’s your take?

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

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Give HP storage some love and short strokin

Server and StorageIO industry trends and perspective DAS

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

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


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

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Why FC and FCoE vendors get beat up over bandwidth?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

How much SSD do you need vs. want?

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

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

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

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

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

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

Storage I/O Industry Trends and Perspectives

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

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

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

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

Related links
What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do
Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Spring (May) 2012 StorageIO news letter

StorageIO News Letter Image
Spring (May) 2012 News letter

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

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

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

You can subscribe to the news letter by clicking here.

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

Nuff said for now

Cheers
Gs

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

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

Posted on

Are large storage arrays dead at the hands of SSD?

Storage I/O trends

An industry trends and perspective.

.

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

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

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

Storage I/O trends

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

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

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

Storage I/O trends

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

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

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

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

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

Industry trend: People plus data are aging and living longer

No Such Thing as an Information Recession

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

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be

Storage I/O trends

Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be

In a recent conversation with Dave Raffo about the nand flash solid state disk (SSD) market, we talked about industry trends, perspectives and where the market is now as well as headed. One of my comments is, has been and will remain that the industry has still not reached anywhere near full potential for deployment of SSD for enterprise, SMB and other data storage needs. Granted, there is broad adoption in terms of discussion or conversation and plenty of early adopters.

SSD and in particular nand flash is anything but dead, in fact in the big broad picture of things, it is still very early in the game. Sure, for those who cover and crave the newest, latest and greatest technology to talk about, nand flash SSD might seem old, yesterday news, long in the tooth and time for something else. However, for those who are focused on deployment vs. adoption such as customers, in general, nand flash SSD in its many packaging options has still not yet reached its full potential.

Despite the hype, fanfare from CEOs or their evangelist along with loyal followers of startups that help drive industry adoption (e.g. what is talked about), there is still lots of upside growth in the customer drive industry deployment (actually buying, installing and using) for nand flash SSD.

What about broad customer deployments?

Sure, there are the marquee customer success stories that you need a high-capacity SAS or SATA drive to hold the YouTube videos, slide decks, press releases for.

However, have we truly, reached broad customer deployment or broad industry adoption?

Hence, I see more startups coming into the market space, and some exiting on their own, via mergers and acquisition or other means.

Will we see a feeding frenzy or IPO craze as with earlier hype cycles of technologies, IMHO there will be some companies that get the big deal, some will survive as new players running as a business vs. running to be acquired or IPO. Others will survive by evolving into something else while others will join the where are they now list.

If you are a SSD startup, CEO, CxO, or marketer, their PR, evangelist or loyal follower do not worry as the SSD market and even nand flash is far from being dead. On the other hand, if you think that it has hit its full stride, you are missing either the bigger picture, or too busy patting yourselves on the back for a job well done. There is much more opportunity out there and not even all the low hanging fruit has been picked yet.

Check out the conversation with Dave Raffo along with comments from others here.

Related links on storage IO metrics and SSD performance
What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do
Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
Storage and IO metrics that matter
IO IO it is off to Storage and IO metrics we go
SSD and Storage System Performance
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
Are Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) getting too big?
Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers dont agree on future of nand flash SSD
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part IV: What type of SSD is best for your needs

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

More storage and IO metrics that matter

It is great to see more conversations and coverage around storage metrics that matter beyond simply focusing on cost per GByte or TByte (e.g. space capacity). Likewise, it is also good to see conversations expanding beyond data footprint reduction (DFR) from a space capacity savings or reduction ratio to also address data movement and transfer rates. Also good to see is increase in discussion around input/output operations per section (IOPs) tying into conversations from virtualization, VDI, cloud to Sold State Devices (SSD).

Other storage and IO metrics that matter include latency or response time, which is how fast work is done, or time spent. Latency also ties to IOPS in that as more work arrives to be done (IOPS) of various size, random or sequential, reads or writes, queue depths are an indicator of how well work is flowing. Another storage and IO metric that matters is availability because without it, performance or capacity can be affected. Likewise, without performance, availability can be affected.

Needless to say that I am just scratching the surface here with storage and IO metrics that matter for physical, virtual and cloud environments from servers to networks to storage.

Here is a link to a post I did called IO, IO, it is off to storage and IO metrics we go that ties in themes of performance measurements and solid-state disk (SSD) among others. Also check out this piece about why VASA (VMware storage analysis metrics) is important to have your VMware CASA along with Windows boot storage and IO performance for VDI and traditional planning purposes.

Check out this post about metrics and measurements that matter along with this conversation about IOPs, capacity, bandwidth and purchasing discussion topics.

Related links on storage IO metrics and SSD performance
What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do
Is SSD dead? No, however some vendors might be
Storage and IO metrics that matter
IO IO it is off to Storage and IO metrics we go
SSD and Storage System Performance
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
Are Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) getting too big?
Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers dont agree on future of nand flash SSD
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part IV: What type of SSD is best for your needs

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do

What is the best kind of IO? The one you do not have to do

data infrastructure server storage I/O trends

Updated 2/10/2018

What is the best kind of IO? If no IO (input/output) operation is the best IO, than the second best IO is the one that can be done as close to the application and processor with best locality of reference. Then the third best IO is the one that can be done in less time, or at least cost or impact to the requesting application which means moving further down the memory and storage stack (figure 1).

Storage and IO or I/O locality of reference and storage hirearchy
Figure 1 memory and storage hierarchy

The problem with IO is that they are basic operation to get data into and out of a computer or processor so they are required; however, they also have an impact on performance, response or wait time (latency). IO require CPU or processor time and memory to set up and then process the results as well as IO and networking resources to move data to their destination or retrieve from where stored. While IOs cannot be eliminated, their impact can be greatly improved or optimized by doing fewer of them via caching, grouped reads or writes (pre-fetch, write behind) among other techniques and technologies.

Think of it this way, instead of going on multiple errands, sometimes you can group multiple destinations together making for a shorter, more efficient trip; however, that optimization may also take longer. Hence sometimes it makes sense to go on a couple of quick, short low latency trips vs. one single larger one that takes half a day however accomplishes many things. Of course, how far you have to go on those trips (e.g. locality) makes a difference of how many you can do in a given amount of time.

What is locality of reference?

Locality of reference refers to how close (e.g location) data exists for where it is needed (being referenced) for use. For example, the best locality of reference in a computer would be registers in the processor core, then level 1 (L1), level 2 (L2) or level 3 (L3) onboard cache, followed by dynamic random access memory (DRAM). Then would come memory also known as storage on PCIe cards such as nand flash solid state device (SSD) or accessible via an adapter on a direct attached storage (DAS), SAN or NAS device. In the case of a PCIe nand flash SSD card, even though physically the nand flash SSD is closer to the processor, there is still the overhead of traversing the PCIe bus and associated drivers. To help offset that impact, PCIe cards use DRAM as cache or buffers for data along with Meta or control information to further optimize and improve locality of reference. In other words, help with cache hits, cache use and cache effectiveness vs. simply boosting cache utilization.

Where To Learn More

View additional NAS, NVMe, SSD, NVM, SCM, Data Infrastructure and HDD related topics via the following links.

Additional learning experiences along with common questions (and answers), as well as tips can be found in Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials book.

Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials Book SDDC

What This All Means

What can you do the cut the impact of IO

  • Establish baseline performance and availability metrics for comparison
  • Realize that IOs are a fact of IT virtual, physical and cloud life
  • Understand what is a bad IO along with its impact
  • Identify why an IO is bad, expensive or causing an impact
  • Find and fix the problem, either with software, application or database changes
  • Throw more software caching tools, hyper visors or hardware at the problem
  • Hardware includes faster processors with more DRAM and fast internal busses
  • Leveraging local PCIe flash SSD cards for caching or as targets
  • Utilize storage systems or appliances that have intelligent caching and storage optimization capabilities (performance, availability, capacity).
  • Compare changes and improvements to baseline, quantify improvement

Ok, nuff said, for now.

Gs

Greg Schulz – Microsoft MVP Cloud and Data Center Management, VMware vExpert 2010-2017 (vSAN and vCloud). 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. Courteous comments are welcome for consideration. First published on https://storageioblog.com any reproduction in whole, in part, with changes to content, without source attribution under title or without permission is forbidden.

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2026 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO. All Rights Reserved. StorageIO is a registered Trade Mark (TM) of Server StorageIO.

Posted on

More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part II

This follows the first of a two-part series on my latest experiences with Hybrid Hard Disk Drives (HHDD’s) and Solid State Devices (SSD’s). In my ongoing last momentus moment post I discussed what I have done with HHDD’s and setting the stage for expanded SSD use. I have the newer HHDD’s, e.g. Seagate Momentus XT II 750GB (8GB SLC nand flash) installed and have since bought another from Amazon as well as having some of the older 500GB (4GB SLC nand flash) in various systems. Those are all functioning great, however still waiting and looking forward to the rumored firmware enhancements to boost write capabilities.

This brings me up to the latest momentus moment which now includes SSD’s.

Well its two years later and I now have a 256GB (usable capacity is lower) Samsung SSD that I bought from Amazon.com and installed in one of my laptops and just as when I made the first switch to HHDD’s, I also have a backup copy/clone to fall back to in case of emergency.

Was it worth the wait? Yes, particularly using the HHDD’s to bridge the gap and enable some productivity gain which more than paid for them based on some different projects. I’m already seeing productivity improvements that will make future upgrades more easy to justify (to myself).

I deviated from my strategy a bit and installed the SSD about six months earlier than I was planning to do so because of a physical barrier. That physical barrier was my new traveling laptop only accepts 7mm height 2.5 inch small form factor devices and the 750GB HHDD that I had planned on installing was 2.5mm to thick which pushed up the SSD installation.

What will become of the 750GB HHDD? Its being redeployed to help speed up file serving, backups and other functions.

Will I replace the HHDD’s in my other workstations and laptops now with SSD’s? Across the board no, not yet, however there is one other system that is a prime candidate to maybe upgrade in a month or two (maybe less).

Will I stick with the Samsung SSD’s or look at other options? I’m keeping my options open and using this as a gauge to test and compare other options in a real world working environment as opposed to a lab bench test simulation. In other words, taking the next step past the lab test and product reviews, gaining comfort and confidence and then trying out with real use activity.

What will happen in the future as I install more SSD’s and have surplus HHDD’s? Redeployed them of course into file or NAS servers, backup targets that in turn will replace HDD’s that will either get retired, or redeployed to replace older, smaller capacity, higher cost to handle HDD’s used for offsite protection.

I tried using the software that came with the SSD to do the cloning and should have known better, however wanted to see what the latest version of ghost was like (it was a waste of time to be polite). Instead I used Seagate Discwizard (aka Acronis) which requires at least one Seagate product (source or target) for cloning.

Cloning from the Seagate HHDD that have been previously cloned from the Hitachi HDD that came with the laptop, was a none issue. However, I wanted to see what would happen if I attached the Samsung SSD to the Seagate Goflex cable and clone directly from the Hitachi HDD, it worked. Hence another reason to have some of the Seagate Goflex cables (USB and eSATA) like the ones I bought at Amazon.com around in your toolbox.

While I do not have concrete empirical numbers to share, cloning from a HDD to a SSD is shall we say fast, however, what’s really fun to watch is cloning from a HHDD to a SSD using an eSata (GoFlex) connector adapter. The reason I say that it is fun is that you don’t have to sit and wait for hours, it’s not minutes to move 100s of GBs, however you can very much see the progress bar move at a good pace.

Also, I put the HHDD on an eSata port and try that out as a backup or data dump target if you have the need for speed, capacity and cost effectiveness, yes its fast, has lots of capacity and so forth. Now if Seagate and Synology or EMC Iomega would get their acts together and add support for the HHDD’s in those different unified SMB and SOHO NAS solutions, that would be way cool.

Will I be racing to put SSD’s in my other laptops or workstations soon? Probably not as there are things in the works and working their way into and through the market place that I wanted to wait for, and thus will wait for now, that is unless a more interesting opportunity pops up.

Related links on SDD, HHDD and HDD
More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part I
More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part II
IO IO it is off to Storage and IO metrics we go
New Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid drive (SSD and HDD)
Other Momentus moments posts here here, here, here and here
SSD and Storage System Performance
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
Are Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) getting too big?
Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part II)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers dont agree on future of nand flash SSD
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part II)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part IV: What type of SSD is best for your needs

Ok, nuff said for now.

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part I

This is the first of a two part series on my latest experiences with HHDD and SSD’s

About two years ago I wanted to start installing solid state devices (SSD’s) into my workstations and laptops. Like many others, I found the expensive price for the limited capacity gains of the then generation SSD’s did not make for a good business decision based on my needs. Don’t get me wrong, I have been a huge fan of SSD for decades as an IT user, vendor, analysts, consultant and consumer and still am. In fact I have some SSD’s used for different purposes as well as many Hard Disk Drives (HDD) and Hybrid Hard Disk Drives (HHDD’s). Almost two years ago when I first tested the HHDD’s, I did an first post in this ongoing series and this two-part post is part of that string of experiences observed evolving from HDD’s to HHDD’s to SSD’s


Image courtesy of Seagate.com

As a refresher, HHDD’s like the Seagate Momentus XT combine a traditional 7,200 RPM 2.5 inch 500GB or 750GB HDD with an integrated single level cell (SLC) nand flash SSD within the actual device. The SSD in the HHDD’s is part of the HDD’s controller complementing the existing DRAM buffer by adding 4GB (500GB models) or 8GB (750GB models) of fast nand flash SSD cache. This means that no external special controller, adapter, data movement or migration software are required to get the performance boost over a traditional HDD and the capacity above a SSD at an affordable cost. In other words, the HHDD’s bridge the gap between those who need large capacity and some performance increases, without having to spend a lot on a lower capacity SSD.

However based on my needs or business requirements two years ago I found the justification to get all the extra performance of  SSD not quite there when. Back two years ago my thinking was that it would be about two maybe three years before the right point for a mix of performance, availability (or reliability e.g. duty cycles), capacity and economics aligned.

Note that this was based on my specific needs and requirements as opposed to my wants or wishes (I wanted SSD back then, however my budget needed to go elsewhere). My requirements and performance needs are probably not the same as yours or others might be. I also wanted to see the incremental technology, product and integration improvements ranging from duty cycle or program/erase cycles (P/E) with newer firmware and flash translation layers (FTLs) among other things. Particularly with multilevel cell (MLC) or enhanced multilevel cell (eMLC) which helps bring the cost down while boosting the capacity, I’m seeing enough to have more confidence in those devices. Note that for the past couple of years I have used single level cell (SLC) nand flash SSD technology in my HHDD’s, the same SSD flash technology that has been found in enterprise class storage.

While I wanted SSD’s two years ago in my laptops and workstations to improve productivity which involves a lot of content creation in addition to consumption, however as mentioned above, there were barriers. So instead of sitting on the sidelines, waiting for SSD’s to either become lower cost, or more capacity for a given cost, or wishing somebody would send me some free stuff (that may or may not have worked), I took a different route. That route was to try the HHDD’s such as Seagate Momentus XT.

Disclosure: Seagate sent me my first HHDD for first testing and verifications before buying several more from Amazon.com and installing them in all laptops, workstations and a server (not all servers have the HHDD’s, or at least yet).

The main reason I went with the HHDD’s two years ago and continue to use them today is to bridge the gap and gain some benefit vs. waiting and wishing and talking about what SSD’s would enable me to do in the future while missing out on productivity enhancements.

The HHDD’s also appealed to me in that my laptops are space constrained for putting two drives and playing the hybrid configuration game of installing both a small SSD and HDD and migrating data back and forth. Sure I could do that for in the office or carry an extra external device around however been there, done that in the past and want to move away from those types of models where possible.

Related links on SDD, HHDD and HDD
More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part I
More Storage IO momentus HHDD and SSD moments part II
IO IO it is off to Storage and IO metrics we go
New Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid drive (SSD and HDD)
Other Momentus moments posts here here, here, here and here
SSD and Storage System Performance
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
Are Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) getting too big?
Has SSD put Hard Disk Drives (HDD’s) On Endangered Species List?
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part II)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers dont agree on future of nand flash SSD
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part II)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part I: Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part IV: What type of SSD is best for your needs

Ok, nuff said for now, lets resume this discussion in part II.

Cheers Gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Is 14.4TBytes of data storage for $52,503 a good deal? It depends!

A news story about the school board in Marshall Missouri approving data storage plans in addition to getting good news on health insurance rates just came into my in box.

I do not live in or anywhere near Marshall Missouri as I live about 420 miles north in the Stillwater Minnesota area.

What caught my eye about the story is the dollar amount ($52,503) and capacity amount (14.4TByte) for the new Marshall school district data storage solution to replace their old, almost full 4.8TByte system.

That prompted me to wonder, if the school district are getting a really good deal (if so congratulations), paying too much, or if about right.

Industry Trends and Perspectives

Not knowing what type of storage system they are getting, it is difficult to know what type of value the Marshall School district is getting with their new solution. For example, what type of performance and availability in addition to capacity? What type of system and features such as snapshots, replication, data footprint reduction aka DFR capabilities (archive, compression, dedupe, thin provisioning), backup, cloud access, redundancy for availability, application agents or integration, virtualization support, tiering. Or if the 14.4TByte is total (raw) or usable storage capacity or if it includes two storage systems for replication. Or what type of drives (SSD, fast SAS HDD or high-capacity SAS or SATA HDDs), block (iSCSI, SAS or FC) or NAS (CIFS and NFS) or unified, management software and reporting tools among capabilities not to mention service and warranty.

Sure there are less expensive solutions that might work, however since I do not know what their needs and wants are, saying they paid too much would not be responsible. Likewise, not knowing their needs vs. wants, requirements, growth and application concerns, given that there are solutions that cost a lot more with extensive capabilities, saying that they got the deal of the century would also not be fair. Maybe somewhere down the road we will hear some vendor and VAR make a press release announcement about their win in taking out a competitor from the Marshall school district, or perhaps that they upgraded a system they previously sold so we can all learn more.

With school districts across the country trying to stretch their budgets to go further while supporting growth, it would be interesting to hear more about what type of value the Marshall school district is getting from their new storage solution. Likewise, it would also be interesting to hear what alternatives they looked at that were more expensive, as well as cheaper however with less functionality. I’m guessing some of the cloud crowd cheerleaders will also want to know why the school district is going the route they are vs. going to the cloud.

IMHO value is not the same thing as less or lower cost or cheaper, instead its the benefit derived vs. what you pay. This means that something might cost more than something cheaper, however if I get more benefit from what might be more expensive, then it has more value.

Industry Trends and Perspectives

If you are a school district of similar size, what criteria or requirements would you want as opposed to need, and then what would you do or have you done?

What if you are a commercial or SMB environment, again not knowing the feature functionality benefit being obtained, what requirements would you have including want to have (e.g. nice to have) vs. must or have to have (e.g. what you are willing to pay more for), what would you do or have done?

How about if you were a cloud or managed service provider (MSP) or a VAR representing one of the many services, what would your pitch and approach be beyond simply competing on a cost per TByte basis?

Or if you are a vendor or VAR facing a similar opportunity, again not knowing the requirements, what would you recommend a school district or SMB environment to do, why and how to cost justify it?

What this all means to me is the importance of looking beyond lowest cost, or cost per capacity (e.g. cost per GByte or TByte) also factoring in value, feature functionality benefit.

Ok, nuff said for now, I need to get my homework assignments done.

Cheers gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part II)

This is the second of a two-part post about why storage arrays and appliances with SSD drives can be a good idea, here is link to the first post.

So again, why would putting drive form factors SSDs be a bad idea for existing storage systems, arrays and appliances?

Benefits of SSD drive in storage systems, arrays and appliances:

  • Familiarity with customers who buy and use these devices
  • Reduces time to market enabling customers to innovate via deployment
  • Establish comfort and confidence with SSD technology for customers
  • Investment protection of currently installed technology (hardware and software)
  • Interoperability with existing interfaces, infrastructure, tools and policies
  • Reliability, availability and serviceability (RAS) depending on vendor implementation
  • Features and functionality (replicate, snapshot, policy, tiering, application integration)
  • Known entity in terms of hardware, software, firmware and microcode (good or bad)
  • Share SSD technology across more servers or accessing applications
  • Good performance assuming no controller, hardware or software bottlenecks
  • Wear leveling and other SSD flash management if implemented
  • Can end performance bottlenecks if backend (drives) are a problem
  • Coexist or complemented with server-based SSD caching

Note, the mere presence of SSD drives in a storage system, array or appliance will not guarantee or enable the above items to be enabled, nor to their full potential. Different vendors and products will implement to various degrees of extensibility SSD drive support, so look beyond the check box of feature, functionality. Dig in and understand how extensive and robust the SSD implementation is to meet your specific requirements.

Caveats of SSD drives in storage systems, arrays and appliances:

  • May not use full performance potential of nand flash SLC technology
  • Latency can be an issue for those who need extreme speed or performance
  • May not be the most innovative newest technology on the block
  • Fun for startup vendors, marketers and their fans to poke fun at
  • Not all vendors add value or optimization for endurance of drive SSD
  • Seen as not being technology advanced vs. legacy or mature systems

Note that different vendors will have various performance characteristics, some good for IOPs, others for bandwidth or throughput while others for latency or capacity. Look at different products to see how they will vary to meet your particular needs.

Cost comparisons are tricky. SSD in HDD form factors certainly cost more than raw flash dies, however PCIe cards and FTL (flash translation layer) controllers also cost more than flash chips by themselves. In other words, apples to apples comparisons are needed. In the future, ideally the baseboard or motherboard vendors will revise the layout to support nand flash (or its replacement) with DRAM DIMM type modules along with associated FTL and BIOS to handle the flash program/erase cycles (P/E) and wear leveling management, something that DRAM does not have to encounter. While that provides great location or locality of reference (figure 1), it is also a more complex approach that takes time and industry cooperation.

Locality of reference for memory and storage
Figure 1: Locality of reference for memory and storage

Certainly, for best performance, just like realty location matters and thus locality of reference comes into play. That is put the data as close to the server as possible, however when sharing is needed, then a different approach or a companion technique is required.

Here are some general thoughts about SSD:

  • Some customers and organizations get the value and role of SSD
  • Some see where SSD can replace HDD, others see where it compliments
  • Yet others are seeing the potential, however are moving cautiously
  • For many environments better than current performance is good enough
  • Environments with the need for speed need every bit of performance they can get
  • Storage systems and arrays or appliances continue to evolve including the media they use
  • Simply looking at how some storage arrays, systems and appliances have evolved, you can get an idea on how they might look in the future which could include not only SAS as a backend or target, also PCIe. After all, it was not that long ago where backend drive connections went from propriety to open parallel SCSI or SSA to Fibre Channel loop (or switched) to SAS.
  • Engineers and marketers tend to gravitate to newer products nand technology, which is good, as we need continued innovation on that front.
  • Customers and business people tend to gravitate towards deriving greatest value out of what is there for as long as possible.
  • Of course, both of the latter two points are not always the case and can be flip flopped.
  • Ultrahigh end environments and corner case applications will continue to push the limits and are target markets for some of the newer products and vendors.
  • Likewise, enterprise, mid market and other mainstream environments (outside of their corner case scenarios) will continue to push known technology to its limits as long as they can derive some business benefit value.

While not perfect, SSD in a HDD form factor with a SAS or SATA interface properly integrated by vendors into storage systems (or arrays or appliances) are a good fit for many environments today. Likewise, for some environments, new from the ground up SSD based solutions that leverage flash DIMM or daughter cards or PCIe flash cards are a fit. So to are PCIe flash cards either as a target, or as cache to complement storage system (arrays and appliances). Certainly, drive slots in arrays take up space for SSD, however so to does occupying PCIe space particularly in high density servers that require every available socket and slot for compute and DRAM memory. Thus, there are pros and cons, features and benefits of various approaches and which is best will depend on your needs and perhaps preferences, which may or may not be binary.

I agree that for some applications and solutions, non drive form factor SSD make sense while in others, compatibility has its benefits. Yet in other situations nand flash such as SLC combined with HDD and DRAM tightly integrated such as in my Momentus XT HHDD is good for laptops, however probably not a good fit for enterprise yet. Thus, SSD options and placements are not binary, of course, sometimes opinions and perspectives will be.

For some situations PCIe, based cards in servers or appliances make sense, either as a target or as cache. Likewise for other scenarios drive format SSD make sense in servers and storage systems, appliances, arrays or other solutions. Thus while all of those approaches are used for storing binary digital data, the solutions of what to use when and where often will not be binary, that is unless your approach is to use one tool or technique for everything.

Here are some related links to learn more about SSD, where and when to use what:
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers dont agree on future of nand flash SSD
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part II)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments: Part I Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments, Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?

Ok, nuff said for now.

Cheers gs

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

twitter @storageio

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

Posted on

Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part I)

This is the first of a two-part series, you can read part II here.

Robin Harris (aka @storagemojo) recently in a blog post asks a question and thinks solid state devices (SSDs) using SAS or SATA interface in traditional hard disk drive (HDD) form factors are a bad idea in storage arrays (e.g. storage systems or appliances). My opinion is that as with many things about storing, processing or moving binary digital data (e.g. 1s and 0s) the answer is not always clear. That is there may not be a right or wrong answer instead it depends on the situation, use or perhaps abuse scenario. For some applications or vendors, adding SSD packaged in HDD form factors to existing storage systems, arrays and appliances makes perfect sense, likewise for others it does not, thus it depends (more on that in a bit). While we are talking about SSD, Ed Haletky (aka @texiwill) recently asked a related question of Fix the App or Add Hardware, which could easily be morphed into a discussion of Fix the SSD, or Add Hardware. Hmmm, maybe a future post idea exists there.

Lets take a step back for a moment and look at the bigger picture of what prompts the question of what type of SSD to use where and when along as well as why various vendors want you to look at things a particular way. There are many options for using SSD that is packaged in various ways to meet diverse needs including here and here (see figure 1).

Various SSD packaging options
Figure 1: Various packaging and deployment options for SSD

The growing number of startup and established vendors with SSD enabled storage solutions vying to win your hearts, minds and budget is looking like the annual NCAA basketball tournament (aka March Madness and march metrics here and here). Some of vendors have or are adding SSD with SAS or SATA interfaces that plug into existing enclosures (drive slots). These SSDs have the same form factor of a 2.5 inch small form factor (SFF) or 3.5 inch HDDs with a SAS or SATA interface for physical and connectivity interoperability. Other vendors have added PCIe based SSD cards to their storage systems or appliances as a cache (read or read and write) or a target device similar to how these cards are installed in servers.

Simply adding SSD either in a drive form factor or as a PCIe card to a storage system or appliance is only part of a solution. Sure, the hardware should be faster than a traditional spinning HDD based solution. However, what differentiates the various approaches and solutions is what is done with the storage systems or appliances software (aka operating system, storage applications, management, firmware or micro code).

So are SSD based storage systems, arrays and appliances a bad idea?

If you are a startup or established vendor able to start from scratch with a clean sheet design not having to worry about interoperability and customer investment protection (technology, people skills, software tools, etc), then you would want to do something different. For example, leverage off the shelf components such as a PCIe flash SSD card in an industry standard server combined with your software for a solution. You could also use extra DRAM memory in those servers combined with PCIe flash SSD cards perhaps even with embedded HDDs for a backing or preservation medium.

Other approaches might use a mix of DRAM, PCIe flash cards, as either a cache or target combined with some drive form factor SSDs. In other words, there is no right or wrong approach; sure, there are different technical merits that have advantages for various applications or environments. Likewise, people have preferences particular for technology focused who tend to like one approach vs. another. Thus, we have many options to leverage, use or abuse.

In his post, Robin asks a good question of if nand flash SSD were being put into a new storage system, why not use the PCIe backplane vs. using nand flash on DIMM vs. using drive formats, all of which are different packaging options (Figure 1). Some startups have gone the all backplane approach, some have gone with the drive form factor, some have gone with a mix and some even using HDDs in the background. Likewise some traditional storage system and array vendors who support a mix of SSD and HDD drive form factor devices also leverage PCIe cards, either as a server-based cache (e.g. EMC VFCahe) or installed as a performance accelerator module (e.g. NetApp PAM) in their appliances.

While most vendors who put SSD drive form factor drives into their storage systems or appliances (or serves for that matter) use them as data targets for creating LUNs or file systems, others use them for internal functionality. By internal functionality I mean instead of the SSD appearing as another drive or target, they are used exclusively by the storage system or appliance for caching or similar purposes. On storage systems, this can be to increase the size of persistent cache such as EMC on the CLARiiON and VNX (e.g. FAST Cache). Another use is on backup or dedupe target appliances where SSDs are used to store dictionary, index or meta data repositories as opposed to being a general data pool.

Part two of this post looks at the benefits and caveats of SSD in storage arrays.

Here are some related links to learn more about SSD, where and when to use what:
Why SSD based arrays and storage appliances can be a good idea (Part II)
IT and storage economics 101, supply and demand
Researchers and marketers don’t agree on future of nand flash SSD
Speaking of speeding up business with SSD storage
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part I)
EMC VFCache respinning SSD and intelligent caching (Part II)
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments: Part I Spinning up to speed on SSD
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments, Part II: The call to duty, SSD endurance
SSD options for Virtual (and Physical) Environments Part III: What type of SSD is best for you?

Ok, nuff said for now, check part II.

Cheers gs

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

twitter @storageio

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