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.

Users Cite ILM Shortfalls

Despite some high-profile successes, many users are still wrestling with ILM technology, citing the challenge of data classification and a lack of effective tools for moving information around their storage infrastructures.

ILM, which sets up different "tiers" of storage for data based on its importance, is being championed by a slew of vendors, including EMC, IBM, and Veritas, as a path to major savings for users. Indeed, it can save a lot of time and money: Entertainment giant Warner Bros., for example, recently revealed that it is saving $200,000 a year thanks to the technology. (See Warner Bros..)

Sadly, for many IT managers, ILM reality does not match the vision.

"ILM is a cool idea that has a lot of merit. But classifying data and moving it around is a huge cultural and technical issue," says Hal Weiss, systems engineer at Baptist Memorial Healthcare. The idea of allocating storage based on the value of the data isn't new, he insists. But defining what needs to be saved and what doesn't can be insurmountable for some organizations.

Likewise, the problem isn't new. (See Users Face Classification Crisis.) But so far, it's not getting solved. "The number one thing that people are grappling with is classification," adds Dan Tanner, a member of the Storage Networking User Group of New England (SNUGNE) and founder of consulting firm ProgresSmart. He says users must choose between classifying their storage metadata or deploying a "content knowledge" product for more in-depth classification.

  • 1