Someone PLEASE design a Vader-style helmeted Vulture for the masthead!
Storage wars are ongoing across the galaxy and of course every supplier claims the force is with them. Here's the latest news overheard from the wretched hive of scum and villainy otherwise known as the storage industry. Splunk climbs K2 Kaminario is using Splunk Enterprise to provide analytics for its K2 arrays and also …
The storage market will plummet because companies will stop building storage systems when they should be building database systems.
1) AzureStack, OpenStack, AWS, Google Cloud will start being seen at home for enterprises. These systems have been saving massive amounts of space by dumping traditional storage systems.
2) Storage will no longer be blocks or files or strictly objects. Systems will storage data strictly as structured, unstructured or blob. All three of these systems scale-out beautifully by simply adding more inexpensive nodes and eliminate the complexity and cost of fault tolerant designs. Records are sharded across nodes and based on heuristics, store data a minimum of three times and archives data to spinning disks as the data grows colder or is marked deleted. As such, there is far less waste. Performance increases almost infinitely as more inexpensive nodes are added and map/reduce technologies give incredible performance. As such, file and block storage will start being shunned as they are generally a REALLY BAD IDEA.
3) Stateless applications will make great progress taking over. All new applications will be developed towards cloud platforms and on functions or lambdas (FaaS). The cost difference is so incredibly drastic that companies will even start rewriting systems for FaaS. The reason is that FaaS uses approximately 10,000 to 25,000 less computing resources and are far easier to operate. Applications running on crappy networks with crappy nodes repetitively outperform the best Cisco or Oracle have to offer. As for storage, what's better? Two super fast 32GB SAN fabrics shared across massive servers accessing gigabytes per second or a well designed system running on 200 Raspberry Pis with map/reduce technology for distributing the load and gathering information as it reaches where it is needed? That's right, option #2 will destroy the absolute best that Netapp or EMC have to offer every single time.
4) Virtual machines won't go away and companies will still piss away good money after bad to maintain and grow their virtual machine platform without even knowing why. They'll look at VM and storage statistics and not bother talking with the DBA to identify whether there is something which can be done to cut CPU and storage requirements. Companies will learn that no matter how much more advanced data centers get, they always cost more... not less. The minimum entry price to a virtualized data center today (assuming standard industry discounts) is about $1.9 million. If you cut corners and spend less, you really really really should be in the cloud instead. It costs $1.9 million to buy 6 servers, 4 switches and all the applicable software licenses to run a VMware data center. A 6 blade data center is the minimum configuration for almost guaranteeing one machine is always up. Dumping VMware and using Hyper-V will cut the cost under a million and using Huewai instead of Cisco can save maybe another hundred thousand... oddly, as a hard core Cisco guy, I'm considering Dell as a replacement for Cisco servers at the moment as Cisco desperately needs to rewrite UCS manager now that data centers are completely changed.
I can go on... but storage as we know and use it today is going to be nearly dead because scaleout has come to SQL, NoSQL and Blob. There just isn't any reason to invest in SAN or file storage anymore.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021