RSS
Email
Print
ShareStorage Applications vs. Storage Systems
Posted by George Crump on August 13, 2009
The current, predominant configuration for SAN or NAS storage is a dual controller RAID system to which storage system manufacturers add software that allows the storage to do things you really want it to do, like thin provisioning, snapshots, replication and other capabilities. With few exceptions, the intellectual property in these systems is, for the most part, in the software not the hardware. So why can't you just buy the storage as an application and run it on your own hardware?
Storage applications are nothing new. In the late 90's, companies like FalconStor, DataCore and a host of others, who have now either been bought or closed their doors, provided software that you would load on a server, and it could manage any attached disk. Today, even the large storage vendors like NetApp, IBM and HDS have embraced this concept to a degree. They allow you to integrate other storage into controllers or heads that you have to buy from them.
With the rise in number of OEM manufacturers of storage and hardware focused array providers, such as Intel, Nexsan, LSI and Xyratex, as well as the exponential increase in performance of a mid-range Intel processor, why not just get the software and build the storage system yourself? Software companies like FalconStor and DataCore are seeing business increase, as are Nexenta, Sun's ZFS, StarWind Software and others. In fact, many of the storage industry leaders bill themselves as software companies not hardware companies.
With the cost of mid-range servers and the declining costs of hardware-focused storage manufacturers' systems, the build-it-yourself method is very attractive. While you can debate how optimized the storage applications are -- even if they aren't as well matched to the hardware as some of the storage systems manufacturer's codes are -- all that extra Intel processing can overcome a lot of shortcomings. Finally, if you don't want to build it yourself, storage resellers will build it for you for less than the cost of getting a system from a lead manufacturer.
What are the storage systems manufacturers going to do? Clearly they are not going to fold up their tents and go home. In the high end of the market, companies like 3PAR, EMC and HDS are investing more in their platforms, moving code to specialized silicon for performance, implementing high speed back end infrastructures, and of course, single point of service. These suppliers' business remains unaffected.
Clustered storage systems like those from Isilon Systems and Scale Computing also tend to lend themselves to getting the hardware and software from a single place. Tight integration and compatibility is critical in these environments, and to an extent, the software and the hardware are more deeply intertwined there.
Beyond those two cases, if your storage needs are basic midrange or SMB storage and you don't have the need for high performance scale out storage, exploring a solution that makes storage an application can be very compelling. As always, there is never one perfect solution for all data centers and often not even one perfect solution for a single data center.
Comment by Storage Advocate on August 13, 2009 5:40 PM
George, why not Mention XIV Storage from IBM, I have noticed that Byte and Switch has not had a single mention of XIV.
Reply to this comment
Comment by DanB on August 13, 2009 8:09 PM
George,
Great post. Storage software that runs on standard hardware is what I'm betting on, but primarily for my file-based data (my DBs will still run on SAN). This allows me to work with storage as I do all my other applications. I get to choose the hardware that best meets my budget and performance needs (translates to lower cost). Actually, I am now able to leverage the current procurement agreement I have with one of the major server vendors to get optimal pricing. I can create a storage cluster on standard servers, which my purchasing guy really liked because he was able to get better pricing since we'd be ordering more gear from them. Was a little skeptical about this approach at first, but I downloaded software from Caringo and had a cluster operational without a lot of effort. I also like the fact I can increase capacity when I need to and all the servers the cluster is running on are leased (reduced my CapEx, always good) .
Count me as a proponent of the software model for storage and agree that this is the direction its heading. However, I don't thing this is going to be something I look at for our SAN-based applications, at least not yet. But, I'll be keeping my eyes open.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Lee Johns on August 13, 2009 8:20 PM
Nice post George. At HP we agree that storage is incresingly becoming an application that runs on industry standard server platforms coupled with large amounts of disk. Just look at the HP Extreme Data Storage Platform, HP X1000 unified storage server, HP LeftHand P4000 SAN and our recent IBRIX aquisition and you can see how far and wide the architecture plays.
There are a few things that I think are different in our strategy though:-
1) This is not purely an SMB play. No area of the storage market will remain untouched.
2) The fact that you are using common platforms enables more converged server and storage infrastructure solutions bringing the application and the data closer together. Check out the HP Oracle Exadata Database machine or the HP BladeSystem Matrix
3) Customers don't generally want do it yourself infrastructure. They want solutions that are vertically integrated but flexible and cost effective so they can buy wnat they want when they need it through flexible sourcing options.
Watch HP George. We just might make it look like you have a crystal ball.
Lee Johns, Marketing Director, HP StorageWorks
Reply to this comment
Comment by George Crump on August 13, 2009 9:47 PM
Storage Advocate, I don't have anything against IBM but need to be kept up to date. I can and do my own research but hearing from the horses mouth is always best. I've asked IBM XIV for a briefing several times. Send IBM my way.
Dan B: You get it! Nice work. I agree with your strategy, but SAN can play now in many instances. Depends on what your are comfortable with, and it seems like you have things under control. Great work.
Lee Johns: I have a very close eye on HP. I am a bit concerned we will see how you guys do. I held off on commentary on the IBRIX deal until we see what you guys can do. The problem I have now is that all your stuff must (or its is strongly advised) have some HP hardware. Not quite storage as an application. As with Storage Advisor I am open to a more detailed discussion.
All, Thanks for the comments.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Zorian Rotenberg on August 14, 2009 1:30 AM
Great post!
Software SAN solution that converts a server into a SAN is an excellent choice for many users today. You can choose whether you want your SAN to run on a Dell 2950, an HP ProLiant DL380 G5 or an IBM xSeries. You get to build and design your own SAN and set the optimal configuration that fits your needs. Traditional "pre-configured" SANs do not fit everyone's environments equally and SAN software is analogous to what the big SAN vendors call their "firmware".
Many IT professionals want to select their own high-performance SAS or SATA drives and configure the systems optimally for their environments. And SAN software costs less than $3000 and offers advanced features like Synchronous Data Mirroring, Asynchronous Remote Replication over a WAN, Instant Snapshots and Thin Provisioning too. All the features you need!
Ultimately, what SAN software gives the "freedom of choice" back to you, the IT administrator, and allow you to pick from the best of breed hardware while building a custom SAN that fits your needs better than a traditional SAN which also is much more expensive.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Zorian Rotenberg on August 14, 2009 1:36 AM
By the way, in reference to my previous post -- certainly in the spirit of full disclosure, I am CEO of StarWind Software. While I am in the industry and speak with ostensible bias, I sinerely believe that I described a real trend over the past many years especially with small and midsize enterprises that can get a lot more value from SAN software rather than a traditional SAN box, all at truly affordable price which buys the same rock-solid reliability, performance and scalability that you get with the big vendors.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Anonymous on August 14, 2009 1:44 PM
Interesting take on Storage as an application.Even more interesting, are some of the comments, or should I say commentor's. There are plenty of open source alternatives(openSuse for one) that can provide you with storage service's you require as well as many other services you may need. All in one nice little package. With the advances in SAS technology and commodity servers, you can make some incredibly flexible storage subsystems. And very much on the cheap.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Evan Powell on August 14, 2009 3:56 PM
HP is incredibly strong in servers and related systems, but in midrange unified storage competing directly with leading NAS and SAN vendors my information is that the attach rate for non HP products on HP blades is higher than for HP products.
I think this actually represents an opportunity for HP (and for Dell, Cisco, IBM as well). To the extent these vendors embrace storage as a (special) application running on industry standard servers they can increase the CPU cycles of their own gear, increase account control, and provide improved integrated solutions as mentioned in this comment from HP. We are already seeing pockets of adoption at the big PS firms as well for similar reasons.
Another related point is the use of industry standard file systems to eliminate lock-in not just in the business model (selling software only and allowing system vendors to sell systems) but also in the technology itself. In our case (I am CEO of Nexenta), we use the next generation file system ZFS which has lots of attributes -- one of which is that there are many ways to access ZFS on the market including our own nexenta.org open source solution. So, we must earn every dime of customer spend and cannot rely, in anyway, on locking customers into a proprietary set of technologies. This also limits the risk of customers adopting our solution.
Reply to this comment
Comment by NeedMoreStorage on August 14, 2009 4:22 PM
Guys, it is very obvious to many of us why "storage as application" is already very popular and will only grow more as an industry.
Think VMware. Remember ten years ago nobody thought that you would be buying a server not as a metal box but as a software application. So just like people buy servers in a form of software, they also buy storage in a form of software. Vmware paved the way on this.
We use the free open source Linux solution Openfiler but it unfortunately doesn't run on Windows server and we only got it because it was free. But for Windows and production settings you can look at Datcore or Starwind and they are both excellent ISCSI products depending on your needs and budget.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Blake White on August 14, 2009 11:52 PM
George,
Great posting. I am the President of a services only infrastructure firm in Virginia Beach, VA. (Endurance Network Services) We have been implementing SANs built on Datacore since 2000-2001. We sought out a vendor neutral solution that allowed us to interchange storage for our clients as it continued to decline in price. After finding Datacore, we built our storage practice around their product line.
This approach has saved our clients significant costs and provided them high end storage performance that they could not have afforded otherwise. When a client can buy mid-to-high storage performance by using a standard Dell/HP server its win win for everyone.
As server technology evolves and becomes faster and lower in cost they can immediately interchange storage controller hardware and reap the benefits of faster technology. The R&D and Q&A required of other storage vendors don???t allow the immediate use of the fastest processor and memory technologies.
In addition to the cost savings, we are able to train in-house IT on basic storage allocation and management without the need for extensive offsite training. The feedback from our clients continues to be 100% positive.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Tom Lassen on August 15, 2009 11:34 AM
DataCore was a pioneer in this space and their product is great.
The only issue I have is that there no NAS support and it's not open source.
Reply to this comment
Comment by ChrisP on August 17, 2009 1:41 AM
I have been talking about this since 2004. Go to:
http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid5_cid640735_mem1,00.html for my 2005 storage predictions, which also link to the 2004 predictions.
or simply Google " the year of programmable storage"
Sun had it right in the 90's. "It's the network stupid". Turns out that we are finally seeing those predictions come true in the convergence of the storage network and server network, server virtualization and storage virtualizaiton, fabric and array level intelligence. Moving intelligence to the network makes disk a commodity. Storage vendors are moving as fast as they can to make the array a storage switch.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Joe Tomaselli on August 17, 2009 10:29 PM
Blake, I got to be honest with you but DataCore fails on many counts. Impossible to install without many hours of training and really overpriced. Why spend $40,000 on their software? I would rather get HP LeftHand or Dell EqualLogic.
And for a company that is so "advanced", they not not have 64-bit support until just a few months ago. We looked at them this year year when we needed 64 bit and they did not have it. Everyone else already did for a while. Sorry but DataCore is ok but not great. They are behind the curve and have been for a while.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Calvin Zito, HP StorageWorks on August 19, 2009 6:02 PM
Hi George,
Lee Johns and I recorded a podcast talking about our perspective on this topic. You can find it here: http://bit.ly/yLDSn
Sounds like you have mostly problems with what HP is doing. I'll leve it to my AR manager to talk further with you. But here's what I'd say: HP is the #1 server vendor in the world and sells more disk drives than anyone else in the world. To us it makes sense to bring this all together and make it easy for customers to implement solutions like HP LeftHand, PolyServe, and IBRIX via an appliance. But I know that today we do sell LeftHand and PolyServe software. We haven't announced IBRIX plans publicly yet so I'll have to keep you hanging on that.
We think customers find a lot of value in an integrated hardware/software solution versus selling just the software.
Reply to this comment
Comment by George Crump on August 19, 2009 6:08 PM
Calvin, trust me I have kept the powder dry. I'll wait for the AR team to call.
Reply to this comment