In addition to the problems with virtualization, the technologies that power the SANs (storage-area networks) on which the software lies are not entirely decided. We think Ethernet and IP-based storage will triumph over Fibre Channel solutions. This gives us pause about Fibre Channelonly proposals. Although virtualization has benefits, such as allocation on the fly and improved manageability, potential loss and the necessity of forklift upgrades outweigh the advantages.
Our RFI went to Compaq Computer Corp., DataCore Software Corp., FalconStor Software, StorageTek, StoreAge Networking Technologies and Veritas Software on behalf of the fictional Engulf and Devour Corp. (EDC), a financial services company with a history of making acquisitions (see "Our Scenario," and the RFI). Only StorageTek declined to respond, indicating it wasn't in a position to complete the work.
EDC has one data center in Jacksonville, Fla., and a second in Huntsville, Ala. Two decades of expansion have taken their toll on the company's data-storage layout. EDC's e-mail and CRM (customer-relationship management) cluster servers are attached to NAS (network-attached storage) devices, while the data-mining server has its own small SAN. The remaining servers are direct-attached storage, including an IBM RS/6000, a Sun Microsystems ES-10000 and various application servers. EDC plans to use its data centers as redundant facilities. This requires not only mirroring but logical changes to the storage infrastructure. EDC hopes virtualization will consolidate its storage and help accomplish its goals.
In examining each RFI response, we first checked for completeness. How fully did the vendor answer our questions and address the ambiguities contained therein? We intentionally didn't mention that EDC needs fault tolerance, for example, because we considered it incumbent on the vendor to alert EDC to the inadequacy of its storage setup. Next, we looked at the total solution, with an eye toward ease of implementation, expansion and management. Finally, we assessed the vendor's provisions for training and ongoing support.
All the companies that responded offer some scalability. The out-of-band architectures, such as those of Compaq and StoreAge, have an advantage over in-band solutions, such as DataCore's and FalconStor's, but all five solutions are expandable enough for EDC. Compaq's solution has some of the best reporting features. The company's SANworks Storage Resource Manager offers a rich array of reporting tools designed for the storage administrator. DataCore, FalconStor and Veritas provide adequate reporting, while StoreAge's reporting tools leave something to be desired. All the vendors tout their solutions' ease of use, and we have no reason to refute that.
On the training front, we were surprised by how little instruction the vendors recommend to operate the virtualization solutions. The proposals vary from one week (Compaq and Veritas) to as little as a half day (StoreAge). Veritas claims that because virtualization is an infrastructure tool that end users never see, helpdesk personnel have no need for training. We disagree. The helpdesk is often asked to perform many small storage-related tasks, so the customer, not Veritas, should decide whether its helpdesk staff needs training.
ROI: Really, Only ID
We would have liked to consider the vendors' return on investment projections, but we found them so varied--and wild--that we're convinced these claims are little more than wishful thinking. DataCore, for example, expressed its ROI in terms of dollars saved--35.5 million of them--but added that even if the numbers were off by a factor of 10, ROI would still be more than $3 million. Face it: ROI is a magic term that means different things to different people, from hard dollars (money saved directly by upgrading) to soft dollars (money saved by factors like decreased downtime).
We recommend that each organization conduct its own ROI analysis, a process that requires you to ask tough questions. First, ask each vendor about the technology it employs. Ask why that particular flavor of virtualization--in-band, out-of-band or host-based--is better than the other two. Next, look long and hard at the vendor. Does the provider push virtualization only, or does it offer a wide variety of services? How long has the vendor been in business? How many wins does the company have? Talk to other IT professionals who have implemented the vendor's solution. Finally, explore the company's financial stability. Is the vendor a veritable rock of durability and profitability?
In distributing our RFI, we tried to get to the heart of these matters. The vendors' responses were telling in what they did and didn't say, and how they said it.
Although we don't feel that any of the vendors participating in our RFI deserve our Editor's Choice award, we compliment DataCore on its thorough proposal and would put the company on a list of vendors to revisit if and when virtualization matures.
RSS
