back to article Wikibon sticking to server SAN takeover idea

The August 2016 Wikibon report "Server SAN Readies for Enterprise and Cloud Domination" repeats the message of its Server SAN Research Project 2014 report, saying that "storage is moving inexorably from traditional storage arrays to Server SAN in a server rack." The report summary says the world-wide Server SAN market added $1 …

  1. Korev Silver badge
    Devil

    3D Pie Chart?

    Just say no...

  2. thegreatsatan

    anyone predicting more than 1 year out

    is bound to be wrong. also, server-san is the dumbest

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wikibon

    There hasn't been a trend they didn't like.

    A bunch of slick willies on vendors pockets...

    I have these guys on #ignore

  4. Yaron Haviv

    Totally ignoring the real trends

    This view is assuming vSAN (block storage) continue to dominate the market

    when in fact file, object, NoSQL, BigData, .. are gaining faster momentum, and are the dominant in the public cloud

    Hyperscale guys dont use SAN or HCI for their Cloud Data Services, but pure DAS with clustering at the App/Data layer, i also dont see why someone building an Splunk, HDFS or Cassandra cluster or distributed File/Object would want to put it on top of vSAN/Nutanix (unless they want to really kill their performance or add significant costs)

    time to wake-up, the infrastructure world is changing dramatically, and is driven by public cloud quest for efficiency w/o legacy BS

    Yaron

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Totally ignoring the real trends

      That's right! We need to built disparate solutions each with its own clustering so we can end up where we were 30 years ago! Independent silos!

      I'm all up for that! I'll have a job for ever managing and troubleshooting that shit

      1. Yaron Haviv

        Re: Totally ignoring the real trends

        if you install C*, Mongo, and many modern apps the clustering is in the app layer and that can NOT be avoided, since cache, metadata and indexes should be also in sync, having HA at the disk layer doesn't eliminate app clustering just adds complexity. modern apps have more search efficient compression in the DB layer, making block dedup/compression useless..

        right you dont want many independent "stateful" stacks, why its time to converge and modernize them, or move the Data API to a layer that doesn't duplicate clustering in both the app layer and the storage layer. the real Data-silos are in the DATA layer, the key to decipher the blocks is not in the SAN but in the apps, blocks are dumb, having blocks from different apps in the same pool doesn't eliminate silos, it creates them, forcing all data access through a specific VM which has the "key"

        the report talks about hyper-scale using HCI, that is misleading, the biggest repos they have use DAS and clustering in the app layer for the reasons i outlined, can read more details in: https://sdsblog.com/cloud-data-services/

        Yaron

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Totally ignoring the real trends

          All of the examples you mention rely on replication to achieve redundancy. Is triple mirrored data really more efficient than p,q erasure codes?

          It's a full reshard of data the way to increase computational attach to the data set instead of a network configuration and a provision event?

          There are reasons for why thinks line elastic, mongo et al are designed the way they are. None of them has anything to do with a dislike for pooled storage, most of them has to do with many of the existing storage interfaces are really crappy for highly distributed applications and high metadata load factors.

          But that's being solved as we speak. And in most of the serious hyper scalers this has been solved (although the recipes aren't being shared). Hint, they don't use any of the techniques mentioned in the article.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ScaleIO != Scale Computing

    "We're left with ScaleIO and then the large Other category."

    I suspect you meant to say Scale Computing in that last sentence.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon