- Storage White Papers
There have been a couple of articles on The Register over the last couple of days talking about EMC CTO John Roese and his use of the terms “Capacity Tier” for VMAX storage and “Performance Tier” for their flash solutions. Sadly this shows EMCs CTO has an outdated view of the industry, is perpetuating old-school views of storage to meet marketing purposes and isn’t doing justice to even EMC’s product portfolio. Here’s why.
The Working Set
Anyone working closely with any operating system knows you have a working set of data on which most activity is happening. Where possible, you want all this data in memory, as bus-connected memory is very fast. However for resiliency, data occasionally has to be written to a permanent storage medium and data also changes from hot (active) to cold (inactive) over time, meaning the working set of active data changes.
As we evolve storage, the aim should be to have all of the active working set in memory or on flash, as close to the processor as possible and running as fast as possible, while ensuring data availability in case of things like power loss. Thinking of “performance” and “capacity” tiers isn’t really relevant as everything over time will be on the capacity tier except for that in memory. We’re moving to that today with PCIe SSD and a recent announcement from Diablo Technologies, which I’ll cover in a separate post.
The Architect’s View
“Capacity” and “Performance” are traditional ways of describing storage infrastructure. We’re already moving away from this. EMCs CTO is stuck between the technology and his marketing department, looking to perpetuate those high margin VMAX licences. EMC’s strategy today seems to be scatter-gun based – keep the old VMAX and VNX workhorses with their great margins, while trying to build business with Flash, PCIe & technology like ScaleIO. EMC could do with showing us a strategy, not a marketing portfolio.
- EMC CTO: I called flash a ‘performance tier’ but don’t like the phrase - The Register
- EMC Demotes VMAX into ‘capacity tier’ – The Register
Comments are always welcome; please indicate if you work for a vendor as it’s only fair. If you have any related links of interest, please feel free to add them as a comment for consideration.
Subscribe to the newsletter! – simply follow this link and enter your basic details (email addresses not shared with any other site).
Copyright (c) 2013 – Brookend Ltd, first published on http://architecting.it, do not reproduce without permission.
- Netapp: The Inflexibility of Flexvols (12,266)
- Windows Server 2012 (Windows Server “8″) – Storage Spaces (11,435)
- Enterprise Computing: Why Thin Provisioning Is Not The Holy Grail for Utilisation (9,641)
- Comparing iSCSI Targets – Microsoft, StarWind, iSCSI Cake and Kernsafe – Part I (7,474)
- Windows Server 2012 (Windows Server “8″) – Virtual Fibre Channel (7,334)
- Review: Compellent Storage Center – Part II (7,307)
- Why Does Microsoft Hyper-V Not Support NFS? (6,696)
- How To: Enable iSNS Server in Windows 2008 (6,251)
- Data ONTAP 8.0 – Part III (5,737)
- How Many IOPS? (4,672)
- The Virtual Machine is a Legacy Construct (18)
- Netapp: The Inflexibility of Flexvols (10)
- HP 3PAR 7450 All Flash Array (6)
- Reinventing The Storage Array and Learning From Blackblaze (5)
- Understanding EVA (5)
- XtremIO: What You Need to Know (Updated) (4)
- Why Does Microsoft Hyper-V Not Support NFS? (4)
- Quick Thought: Gartner SSD Market Analysis (3)
- How Many IOPS? (3)
- Windows Server 2012 (Windows Server “8″) – Storage Spaces (3)