Comment EMC is extending its storage arrays into application engines. Oracle and others, such as start-up Nutanix, have had the idea of bringing stored data closer to the server to reduce network latency and get faster access to data. An additional way of getting much faster data access is to put a load of flash memory into …
I am sure Cisco & NetApp would be interested to hear more
Your tweet was 100% spot on: Cisco will be very pi**** off & NetApp very glad to hear this! Bye VBlock, long live FlexPod ;)
Uhh, this is Project Lightning that they announced (publicly) at EMC World in May.
No, it isn't
No, it isn't.
Project Lightning was about array controlled flash cards inside the compute nodes (servers), like FusionIO, but with end to end control over data movement and placement.
Watch the horizon
One risk EMC is running is that someone will say
"Servers are commodity. There's no real hardware magic in a storage array, since I can buy all the components, using servers for the head unit, SATA JBODs (or a server with 12 bays) and really low $$/TB drives. So if I can buy the software or, better, use open-source, can I stop paying $1000/TB for "traditional" storage gear?"
With the cloud approach, many cloud providers will be looking for reputable white-box solutions, especially if they are committed to an open stack of software. If that happens, EMC could miss out on a considerable chunk of the market. Dell might position to compete, but look to Mitac and Huawei and other white-box makers yet unknown to make great inroads into the cloud market.
EMC Symmetrix = World's most expensive x86 server
I think the idea of dedicated servers with large locally attached storage makes sense for certain applications. But putting a general purpose app on the world's most expensive RAID controller probably does not make sense.
Let me guess...
EMC announces they will be announcing something off in the future again, and it will change the storage industry. I can't believe you journalists fall for it every time.
In effect, this is a return to the bad, old days of DAS (directly attached storage). If your plan is "one storage device per app stack", this EMC idea could be quite good. But, if you have the traditional, monolithic array deployments, then your current array is serving storage to dozens of unrelated apps. It would seem that if you install one of the new EMC "servers" into that kind of environment, and share out the storage to other servers, whilst your new EMC "server" is using cycles to run its applications, your other apps are all stalled due to the EMC not having bandwidth to serve those other servers the data they need. Oh, I see, EMC will want to sell you a complete array for each stack, driving down utilisation and increasing management load, but making EMC more money.....
Absolutely amazing, lets run that crappy app right here on the DMX, with world&dog having access to it.
What could *possibly* go wrong?!
Latency is down to the array's ability to service request from disk or cache and has nothing to do with the wet piece of string inbetween (assuming you have a fabric made in the last decade).
Running apps on an array is a waste of money and just plain stoooopid!
Who thinks of this cr*p?
Only dumbass end-users and journalists would think it's a great idea.
Ahem....Have i heard this before
Has EMC really lost it or is it just me. They are trying to compete with Oracle on two layers, Exadata and Exalogic while they can't compete on single one of them....
a) Exadata : Runs only DB and is eating away substantial amount of business from EMC where database storage is concerned.
b) Exalogic : This is where Oracle runs the weblogic suite. ..
Now, help me understand EMC, if a customer wants to look at your offering...where would he place it in the datacenter...Where exactly....
Paris, 'coz she knows where to place it. ;)