Network Computing is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Eschew Storage Vendors' Obfuscation!

Young North Americans once had a clever response to bureaucratic excuse-making, market spin, or pious baloney, one that made it onto numerous now-collectible bumper stickers: "Eschew Obfuscation!"

It's time to bring back that chestnut and paste it on storage vendors' trade show booths. But it's doubtful that would stem the flow of sheer exaggeration, hyperbole, and technological gobbledygook the suppliers to this market generate.

Case in point: This week, a representative of a VTL vendor of international renown, who shall remain nameless, contacted me requesting an interview with the CEO. Seems the fellow wanted to hold forth on de-duplication. Specifically, he wanted to educate our readers on how "data deduplication approaches vary and outline key considerations for choosing the approach that best meets the needs of large enterprises."

I knew what to expect. The rest of the note confirmed my suspicion: The CEO was eager to compare hash and byte-level de-duplication, as well as in-line versus post-processing.

No thanks, Mr. CEO. Readers have had enough of the de-duplication religious wars. And in spite of claims for various approaches, which most recently emerged in yesterday's news that Overland will adopt Diligent's de-duplication in its VTLs, the fact remains there are arguments for and against the full range of approaches to this technique. There is also some evidence that products of all ilks can be effective.

  • 1