back to article Put storage inside the individual hosts of a virtual cluster? You're CRAZY... Like a fox

Hyperconvergence, putting storage inside the individual hosts of a virtual cluster, was supposed to save us from the cost and expense of centralized storage. Thus far, mainstream providers of hyperconvergence have largely failed to deliver on this promise. 2016 looks set to be the year this finally changes. Nutanix has been …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm sure it's a great article...

    I'm sure it's a great article but I really can't stop staring at her eyebrows.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: I'm sure it's a great article...

      Snap out of it, she can be your daughter.

      I need to make sure my daughter does not see the pic as that means adding a Fenec to the next birthday pester list.

      So while you are staring at the eyebrows and I am staring at the Fenec, who is actually reading the article?

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        who is actually reading the article?

        I read it, but have no idea of what he's talking about!

        1. frank ly

          Re: who is actually reading the article?

          I just hope she doesn't feed it after midnight.

        2. Roger Kynaston

          Re: who is actually reading the article?

          I read it as well but didn't understand it. In the BS bingo league though this seems to score quite highly and hyper is the new term so I propose we hyperconverge our hypervisors with a hypertext interface. In that way we can realise the full potential of our hyperbole.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I'm sure it's a great article...

        > Snap out of it, she can be your daughter.

        Oh sure. I'm not staring in a pervy way. More in a bewildered "what on earth has she done to her eyebrows; and why on earth would you want to do that" kind of way. Mostly a "what on earth has she done" kind of way.

        In know, I know, you're going to tell me that it is "fashion" but I can't help thinking that they are some form of tribute band to the fox.

      3. Baldy50

        Re: I'm sure it's a great article...

        Definite NO,NO, children and nocturnal mammals don't work.

    2. Baldy50

      Re: I'm sure it's a great article...

      Didn't notice them, I was thinking 'keep hold tight luv or It'll fly off'.

  2. Alistair

    @ Trevor:

    Any word on integration with other tools with this set of toys?

    Cloudforms etc?

    Pretty little Fenec. It needs more treats.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Storage in individual hosts is a software problem

    Even if you have infinitely fast links, you still have this extra complication. And you have to replicate everything at least once, to account for host failures, and maintenance would be more complicated as you'd have to insure you didn't take down all copies of active data, etc.

    If you are already going to have complex software that every host depends on, and need at least 2x the actual storage (probably 3x to be safe) in addition to requiring higher performance from individual host connections, exactly where are the savings over centralized storage?

    Even Google, who initially used all that unused space in the hard drives for all their servers have modified that scenario and have dedicated storage nodes now. That should tell us something...

    1. Ken-in-Houston

      Re: Storage in individual hosts is a software problem

      Nutanix offers storage-only nodes.

      Also, with regard to making things more complicated, HCI actually makes things LESS complicated.

      In the absence of a SAN, there is no need to configure LUNs, no need to mask them, manage them, etc. Also, without LUNs, storage access is now much easier and no longer limited: In the past, if you wanted to add storage, you typically had to add an additional LUN. Or, if you were fortunate enough to be able to expand a LUN (not possible with several vendors), that would require downtime to perform.

      Nutanix allows expansion of storage w/o downtime. Actually, expansion of storage is w/o configuration, too! It is literally a 2-click operation.

      You should take a look at Nutanix first, and then form an opinion. It's obvious you do not understand the technology right now.

      1. Lost_Signal

        Re: Storage in individual hosts is a software problem

        Ken in Houston, expanding LUNs with vSphere VMFS and Windows (2008r2 at least) doesn't require downtime. 10 year old EVAs could do this.

        I agree that LUNs suck, but NFS mount points can still cause issues for management. If you don't want LUNs vvols and VSAN with storage based policy management both have you covered (no plugins needed!).

        John-In-Houston :)

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I think many people are way too eager to throw out tried and tested traditional storage. What one should keep in mind is that traditional storage becomes cheaper and cheaper too. So just to give you an example, with Nutanix, you would probably need 2 x 3 nodes, equalling 6 nodes in total, assuming that minimum cluster size is 3 nodes, and that you would like to replicate it to a second site.

    On top of that, you need your switch infrastructure, let's assume minimum 2 switches, 10 Gbps, on both sites, so a total of 4.

    Now, just for fun, compare the price with 2 ESX servers (or use existing ones), connected with SAS to avoid one switch layer (if possible, do not combine storage traffic and other traffic on the same ethernet switches), and 2 x entry level storage such as the SCv2000, and see where the price ends up.

    I'm not sure the price ends up in favor of Nutanix. Of course you then need to factor in cost of administration, but traditional storage has one interface, and nutanix has another interface. On top of that, there's vCenter as well.

    So yes, hyper convergence is simple for predictable workloads, but with traditional solutions, you can scale disk, cpu and network independently of each others.

    What is best? That's up to the user to decide. =)

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Theyre priming for the other news item :-

    Part of that telco as a box will include virtual machines running storage aray clusters. Powered by... Huawei storage arrays.

    Storage vendors warm up your quotes? no, get ready to be bypassed by a one size fits all solution cutting you out the market in one fell swoop more like.

  6. jsimpson

    HCI Block Storage?

    Has anyone other than HPE created a HCI Block Storage appliance? We use alot of Windows/Linux clusters under our VMWare farm but LeftHand is the only block HCI ive seen and its a bit long in the tooth.

    1. wags

      Re: HCI Block Storage?

      Pivot3 has HCI with block storage as well.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon