23 posts • joined 18 Mar 2011
more expensive storage?
Wow .. trying hard to increase margin .. nice move.
First with all the caveats
First to have snapshot with application aware integration? I dont think so seriously.
First to have snapshot with caveats .. yes? roll back to a point in time snapshot but cannot roll forward after that... how cool is that.
First to have deduplication in block storage yes... then again with limitation and caveats
First to have asynchronous replication ? maybe yes and maybe not.. argumentative. But sure have tons of problem with Exchange 2003 in heavy load scenario that cannot even successfully do a failover. I have seen it.
First to have thin provisioning but with tons of overhead and much lesser raw to usable ratio... whats the use of thin provisioning?
First to have the slower system after a period of use .. and require constant de-fragmentation
Cluster scaling .. yes but still restricted to dual-controller sub-system. It is just moving of one to another set of dual-controller nodes. and very different function when use in cluster mode versus classic mode.
But I do admire Netapp capability to mixed up all their feature in their ontap OS. But not all the feature is available in all the modes.
Nothing New .. some startup already done it and got acquire
Nothing new on this aspects. Storsimple already done it. Store data into cloud and data data caching at local. AWS, Azure and etc.
Got acquired by Microsoft. Market segment is different. Will see how Netapp work it out with their cumbersome Ontap (legacy codes full of limitation)
Archiving is for long-term like 6-7 to even 10 years. Will Quantum still be around in 10 years?
Aggregate up to 400TB - LUN Size?
Post only the positive ya? wonder how big is the LUN Size and the actual sharing filesystem size.
This is former LSI Logic Storage. Seriously ... it aint flashy at all given the announcement. Zero fancy feature from DataOntap. Just a normal dual-controller stuffs with SSDs. Dont get me wrong. LSI Logic Storage is pretty good but still a Tier 2 Storage.
3PAR has excellent technology
3PAR has some innovative technology few years back with most vendor already caught up with the technology with little difference.
ASIC technology is excellent but development is always costlier and longer cycle. While HP has excellent technology, it is the integration between the stack in my humble opinion is the key to win the battle and obviously the execution of its Sales and Presales forces on the ground. Sadly... as far as I know within my area, HP has not able to delivered its promise to their customer. Having the best technology does not mean winning but also sales, Presales, delivery and support to function well to really winning the battle.
IMHO ... this will look neater
In my opinion, this solution look neater if they execute correctly with the right software stack.
Similar to EMC VFCache concept
This definitely sound very similar to EMC VFCache technology. Except this only work on Proliant and 3PAR.
imagine the rebuilding time
the larger .. the longer the drive rebuilding using traditional RAID type array....we seriously need a new breakthrough ....
dont kid me ...
HP brought 3PAR. yes.. good move and I like the technology in 3PAR. Other than APEX... which uses Qlogic as its HBA ... what other innovation does HP does with XP? 99.9% Hitachi technology and 0.01% HP??? mmm .. fantastic ... and I didnt see HP selling more XP with APEX then HDS. funny ...
100,000 EVA .. since when? how many of the 100,000 EVA got swapped out by likes of HDS, Netapp, 3PAR (now HP), EMC and etc etc???
Stop dream and get real .... when HP do get real .. then they are serious.
I though it is equivalent .. but it is not
It is not even close ... it is just a bunch of SSD in a Disk enclosure using SAS or SATA interconnect ... mmm .. funny that it is classified as VFCache equivalent? Think VFCAche is greatly mis-understood....
differentiation from existing storage
Seems that other storage company is joining the fray to have end-to-end flash strategy.
FusionIO is excellent technology (natively connect to PCIe instead via a disk controller) that pumped up high IO and superb low latency which easily beats SSD (SAS/FC/SATA base) whether on server or at Storage.
But short coming is the single point of failure unless one using software to replication synchronous to another server or card.
EMC leading the trend here definitely to address high-speed requirement and protection at the same time.... definitely lots of me-too response from many other company.
Percentage usable capacity?
Wonder what is the percentage usable for the price?
From the IBM SPC-1 Full disclosure report :
Application Utilization - 34.62%
Protected Application Utilization - 69.23%???
Unused Storage Ratio of 28.74% ???
Look at the Priced Storage Configuration Diagram ... it does look extremely complex to me. Tons of connection to deliver such performance?
3PAR SPC-1 Full Disclosure Report
Application Utilization : 40.23%
Protected application Utilization : 80.46%
Unused Storage Ratio : 14.53% ...
I think efficiency, simplicity and lesser complexity makes 3PAR a real winner.
comparing to another SPC-1 by HDS.
Application Utilization : 29.25%
Protected application Utilization : 58.5%
Unused Storage Ratio : 39.42% ...
Delivers - 269K IOPs ... Using 146GB 15K 2.5" 1,152 drives... it can support more but why only 1,152 drives?
eight CG8 SVC Storage Engine models used, a 24-port Brocade Fibre Channel switch, and 16 x 2-node V7000 arrays: 1,920 2.5-inch, 146GB, 15,000rpm disk drives in total. ??
8 x CG8 SVC Storage Engine and 16 x 2-Node (32-Node) V7000, that is 4-nodes.. and I wonder if it works as a single cluster? with single Management?
Versus 8-Nodes 3PAR in a single management and single cluster concept.
IBM wins the benchmark I applaud but the setup does look far more complex than 3PAR. Simplicity anyone?
Lots of potential, under delivering ....disappointing
The chaos of the leadership definitely has big impact to the organisation. Competitor easily can take their shaken management, throw more FUDs and undermine customers confidence in HP which over the past few years been shaken badly.
HP seriously need a stronger leadership, not a CEO that just do cost-cutting but a stronger leader to stabilize the organisation, eliminate thick middle layer fats and execute the right thing.
The morale of the staff aint too outstanding... I think could be one of the lowest among the big technology MNC. The prolong of such instability will further damage HP reputation and more lost opportunities... pretty disappointed...
This the worst decision making processes one after another.
How can one eliminate a still profitable although thin margin business and which still take up more than 30% of a company business overnight?
This is madness.... and a wrong decision to kill a product slightly after it launches? Lots of wrong decision and strategy IMHO.
Touchpad launch at a wrong price . Same price as ipad (no 3G) ?? Crazy ...
Plus .. tons of internal staff (including executive) is using ipad, iphone instead of eating own dog food. Try find a iphone user working in google, an android user in apple or iphone/android in Microsoft???
How can consumer believe to buy when internal staff is not using own product?
Industry leader more and more becoming an industry follower .. an utter complete disappointment.
when it is mechanical .. it will fail
as long as there is moving parts ... it will fail ...
common disk failure is batch problem .. anyone in the storage industry knows this nightmare batch problem....
Flash and Largest SATA
15K is almost dead .... if $ per GB only 20% to 30% or even max 50%. 15K RPM drives is redundant.
SATA still has it play I think.
lucky mark hurd decline ...
if not ..I see downfall of AMD. Mark Hurd is never a techno and believe in R&D. Only cost cutting
fancy name but same thing
Fancy name ...... Hybrid aggregate is so much similar to sub-LUN tiering. Except that the entire aggregate may contain multiple LUNs or Filesystem (16TB??)
Real time ... this is cool but will there be ping-pong effect? How small the size they will move? There is always a trade-off doing real-time with policy based. each having own pro and cons. In some environment, the block (16kb, 32kb or whatever size they wanted to implement) may be busy now but by the time you move in real time may not be that busy.
And moving many block up and down the aggregate ... They will need lots of resources as all these movement contribute to more IOPs to the entire system. Well .. 8 core in the horizontal, couple with PCIe 3.0 buses, and multiple socket .. this is possible.
Having flash straight at PCIe business has it own advantages.. for one .. it is extreme high IOPs and lower latency (going to SAN still be in ms versus microsecond??) versus many other array but at the price of smaller capacity
But ... fancy name from Netapp again ... where most vendor already doing these technology for a while .. maybe version 3,0 or 4.0 by the time they release this feature.
By the way .. aint their controller connected HBA also use PCIe??
Back to old school
Why is a bad thing? When you are locked-in. The supplier will come with a fixed date and fixed maintenance price. Tell you straight in the face .. take it at this date and price or leave it without support, maintenance update and etc.
Who is the best
Even one of the best got pawned ... mmm .. we just need to do our due diligence in security. Social hacking still the number 1 hack.
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Updated + vids WHOA: Get a load of Asteroid DX110 JUST MISSING planet EARTH
- 10 years of Facebook Inside Facebook's engineering labs: Hardware heaven, HP hell – PICTURES
- Very fabric of space-time RIPPED apart in latest Hubble pic
- Massive new AIRSHIP to enter commercial service at British dirigible base