• 08/26/2013
    12:15 PM
  • Rating: 
    0 votes
    Vote up!
    Vote down!

Is Microsoft Ready To Be A Storage Player?

Microsoft's Storage Spaces may not have every enterprise feature yet, but don't dismiss it as a marginal product.
Would you expect Microsoft to offer enterprise-class storage? It sounds a bit silly given that a) Microsoft isn't a storage vendor and b) the storage industry behemoths offer plenty of innovative products. But the fact is Windows Server 2012 includes quite a repertoire of storage features, from deduplication to thin provisioning, including the product I'm focusing on here: Storage Spaces.

I don't often focus on a particular vendor in this column, but Storage Spaces is worth covering for two reasons: because Microsoft is an integrated part of the "IT furniture," and because of the view this product gives to a new storage approach.

Formally introduced last September, Windows Server 2012 includes appealing new features for cloud environments, such as improvements to Hyper-V virtualization. A significant chunk of the improvements are storage-focused, letting customers add advanced SAN features to commodity hardware and/or existing storage investments, but with significantly less complexity and cost. Customers gain access to features such as thin provisioning, multi-pathing, deduplication, continuous availability and live migration, which in the past demanded large budgets and storage expertise.

At a high level, Storage Spaces lets organizations buy commodity disk drives (e.g., an array of hard drives often called JBOD, or "just a bunch of disks"), connect them to a Windows server and quickly deploy inexpensive storage with high-level features. Without buying fancy SAN components, customers can get enterprise-class security, performance, scalability and dynamic provisioning. Companies can deploy Storage Spaces on application servers, file servers and Hyper-V virtual machines. The product virtualizes disk resources -- SAS, SATA, JBOD -- into a single pool or multiple pools, with easy capacity expansion.

[ Steve Ballmer badly bungled Microsoft's client services strategy. Can the company recover? Read Ballmer Is Off The Matrix. ]

Storage Spaces lets administrators configure virtual hard disks that deliver attributes such as resiliency, thin provisioning, automatic or controlled allocation and specific administrative control. Customers can configure three types of Spaces:

Simple Spaces: This configuration includes striping data across a number of drives, with no protection from drive failure.

Mirrored Spaces: This configuration stripes data across multiple drives and adds a mirror for failure protection (similar to RAID 10).

Parity Spaces: Here, data is striped across multiple drives, with distributed parity (similar to RAID 5) to protect against drive failure.

Trim is also supported so that administrators can reclaim storage capacity in certain circumstances. The software-based resiliency options deliver RAID-like protection, but without some of the challenges of RAID, such as the RAID write hole -- an indication that despite being a market newcomer, Microsoft isn't afraid to "do its own thing." Microsoft has demonstrated a surprising level of storage sophistication.

For multitenant hosting environments, Storage Spaces supports access control lists to maintain separation, and it can be fully integrated with Active Directory for familiar Windows security. Storage Spaces is also integrated with failover clustering for high availability and load balancing, as well as with Cluster Shared Volumes V2. Also important is the simple management of Storage Spaces -- required if you want to have Windows administrators start handling storage. There's a File and Storage Services GUI in Windows Server Manager, as well as scriptable remote management using APIs and PowerShell and task automation with many new Windows PowerShell cmdlets.

Easier, Cheaper Enterprise-Class Storage

OK, enough on the technical side. Let's talk about customer value.

First, Storage Spaces is easy to use and manage. Your Windows admin can handle it with no additional training, so it also reduces management costs. Next, it provides enterprise-class storage without the complexity and cost of a complex SAN environment.

Microsoft is investing in Storage Spaces. With R2 it's adding sub-LUN tiering, write-back caching, dual-parity protection (similar to RAID 6) and additional deduplication features. It's increasingly obvious that Redmond has every intention of delivering a full suite of enterprise-class features. It has the list and is checking off the boxes one by one.

Will Microsoft Become a Big Storage Player?

The capabilities of Storage Spaces should create some disruption in the SAN value chain. Any time there's something cheaper and easier, it will wreak some havoc. And with 55% of respondents to a recent Enterprise Strategy Group survey citing a moderate to severe lack of administrators who can support storage, there's clearly a hole to fill.

In addition, since most companies have Microsoft products somewhere, its market entry should be a breeze. While the idea of running critical applications in a Windows environment would have been considered unthinkable a decade ago, Windows is now a crucial part of the modern data center. What hasn't changed from the old days is the pain and great expense of conventional storage implementations. Suffice it to say that the market is ripe.

If Storage Spaces works well and Microsoft shops start buying from little JBOD companies, will that cut into the market share of the big gorillas? If Microsoft isn't pushing multimillion-dollar boxes from EMC and HP, what happens to those partnerships?

The virtual SAN concept (using software to virtualize disk resources and "spread the wealth" among servers in a cluster) is already proven. A few examples (beyond the older storage hypervisors) are ScaleIO (recently acquired by EMC), Nutanix, StorMagic, and even HP (with LeftHand VSA software) and VMware.

It will be fascinating to see if the big incumbents treat Storage Spaces dismissively. Expect to hear them declare that Storage Spaces "is fine at the low end" in an attempt to segregate the market. If they do, they could end up like the U.S. auto industry, which initially dismissed the likes of Toyota and Honda in the same way.


re: Is Microsoft Ready To Be A Storage Player?

IMO this stuff is coming from Microsoft's Azure. They are just looking to monetize the things the are building for their cloud by selling it to those that still want to run their own. However, how long will that last? It seems pretty popular for dev and QA environments to head to the cloud. How long will it take prod to follow when someone mentions that dev and QA end up being more reliable and easier to manage than prod?

In that vein, does anyone need to staff SAN storage admins if you can go to your cloud provider's web site, click a few buttons and add more storage to your cloud DB server? I'm sure they'll also offer all the other fancy stuff with the click of a few buttons too.

re: Is Microsoft Ready To Be A Storage Player?

Thanks for the comment - while I believe the MS effort is broader merely Azure the main points you make are good and highlight the potential for massive change in storage specifically and IT in general. Today, and I think this will be the case for a fair few years yet, we are seeing a bifurcation with some users wanting to stay as things have been and others happy to adopt a very new way of doing things. That's a decision for users and a quandary for vendors....since both parties may end up [having to do] doing some of each!

re: Is Microsoft Ready To Be A Storage Player?

Mark, I wrote about Storage Spaces over a year ago as an interesting feature. ( Having had a year to digest Microsoft's approach, I'm not sure this is a feature worth using. Firstly, the original pre-release version had lots of issues (although to be fair I haven't reviewed since). Second there's the discussion on the underlying hardware that needs to be discussed. Who sells servers with hot-swap drives? How will they work with W2K12? How can I replace other failed components without outage? Can I cluster the infrastructure to reduce downtime in replacing failures? Once we get to this level, then common sense says just deploy a cheap storage array. There are lots of excellent ones around.

So, the question is, what exactly is Microsoft's strategy here? To be honest I have to say I don't know. There's no point whatsoever moving back from centralised storage, with all the consolidation, performance, resilience and availability features to server-based storage again without there being a way to address all of those features. Nutanix and others can achieve that because they can cluster many nodes successfully and take nodes in and out at will, making hardware fault management an easy task. I don't think Microsoft have achieved that with Storage Spaces.


re: Is Microsoft Ready To Be A Storage Player?

Hello Chris - thanks for the detailed and constructive comment. I will say that our Lab team has tested the latest version of Storage Spaces and been I do think things have moved along. However, your broader questioning of the strategy and what would/can be used for the underlying hardware is eminently fair. I wrote this piece exactly to highlight what's going on and to encourage the sort of questions you pose. That said I think that how storage and IT gets provided is heading to be something of a religious debate, not necessarily founded in complete logic but in an emotional attachment to doing things one way or another - to some degree irrespective of the logic on either side; and that's why this is an interesting move.