Posts by Hapkido

NetApp adds in-line dedupe to all-flash FAS arrays

Re: Dedupe

"...If those physical blocks die"

Maybe still a case to be had for tape backup?

Even better hey, as you said "multiple physical copies of the data", why not have those physical copies on different media. Disk only backups (inc traditional backup, CDP style, replication etc) is not the only option, expensive and often unnecessary, having one full (backup) copy + logical copies on disk is then maybe a reasonable option, with additional full copies found elsewhere.

While on the subject, why keep old backup data on disk at all?

BLAM! IBM drags its NetApp OEM deal horse outside, gunshot heard

Re: What is there to free ?

My own experience (in more than one country) the majority of N-Series sales (i.e. IBM) were generated when NetApp was already in a favorable position in an IBM site.

Rarely did IBM like leading with N-series from the start.

ARRAY WITH YOU! Storage is growing... but you'll have to make way for new tech

Re: Synchronous replication over distance !

Synchronous replication over long distance?

But the techops link (diagram) clearly shows Synchronous on short distance only and Asynchronous (and periodic) for long distance.

Within the HP Technical white paper it says:

"...HP 3PAR Remote Copy can help limit these costs with our Synchronous Long Distance topology where data is replicated to a nearby data center in synchronous replication mode while simultaneously being replicated asynchronously with Periodic Asynchronous mode...".

Keywords: Synchronous for nearby and Asynchronous for long distance. A good feature to do both from a single source but certainly not Synchronous over long distance. Can we agree?

EMC's DSSD rack flashers snub Fibre Channel for ... PCIe

"A networked all-flash array, using Fibre Channel, will have a read latency of about a millisecond, roughly 17 times longer."

Well that's a misleading statement. Yes for most storage controllers I would agree.

Let's take 5 µs latency per km, then add say 2 µs latency for the FC SAN switch. The rest is in controller and the 'software features'.

Compare the IBM RAMSAN devices (without many software features) to most others that do. That is where most of the difference is. At a guess 25% H/W controller and 75%, you can argue differently. Now, eventually, these 'storage features' will need to be included with PCI based systems (when integrated with shared storage).

6TB - big? Pah! Seagate plans to put out 8TB and 10TB MONSTERS

"At 10TByte in classic RAID you're looking at 1-2 day rebuild times"

Umm, no. 2/3/4 TB are already demonstrating this. So 10TB will be (at the same speed) linearly worse, i.e. 4/5 days plus

Infinidat quietly files 39 patents. Let's take a closer look

NAS is the new SAN

Fibre Channel Industry Association extends roadmap to 128G bps

Ahh yes, the classic: "I can't use FCoE, it has too much latency"

Which is why we all use InfiniBand (being approx. half the latency of FC devices) - not....

NetApp lets virtual swingers swap hypervisor with no guilt

Lusty was very kind there, what about all the other features and functions EMC does not have...

Want a list TheVogon? It would take a while to write.

You are correct about market position though (market gap). Kind of like saying Toyota has more market share than Ferrari, but who makes the better car and by a large margin???

Because all the other gaps, NetApp is ahead.

HP 'clarifies' firmware/support contract rules

Really people,

So if a hard disk fails, the vendor should replace it - what, indefinitely?

C'mon,

All servers have a minimum form of warranty support, typically in our industry it is 12 months as minimum with additional years for maintenance and support as an option. Obviously that first 12 months as std, is built into the cost. The irony, I can imagine some customers reducing this too if it were optional, haha. The vendor (or optional third party businesses) are giving you the option, you pay for it, or you don't.

It really is simple, and not illegal at all.

Profits ONTAP? Not exactly, but storage giant NetApp can exhale now

Re: NetApp as a software vendor

"NetApp as a software vendor is a bit of a scary propsect."

No, the comment was "storage software company"

Integrated? Are you comparing say EMC's generic EMC's Recoverpoint with SnapManager tools?

NetApp leads the market when it comes to integrating O.S. and applications to storage - bar none.

And NetApp does not force you to upgrade (read rip and replace) every system to use the latest management tools.

NetApp unveils ONTAP cluster-shuffler: Do it with any vendor, in public or private

Re: Nothing New .. some startup already done it and got acquire

"...cumbersome Ontap (legacy codes full of limitation)"

Cumbersome and limited as in the first to have de-duplication on primary storage (not backup), first of the big vendors to have thin provisioning, first to provide broad use snapshots (including application aware), one of the first to provide practical asynchronous replication services. How about Unified that everyone and his dog is now selling 10 years later. What about cluster scaling for both file and block services and the list goes on.

Just saying - a different view of the facts.

Storage rage: Like getting a nice steak and being told to only eat 80% of it

Re: It makes perfect sense...

"Don't get me wrong Netapp is a fantastic NAS device but it has no real place in this discussion."

Really? You haven't looked at a storage vendor/market share graph, in say, the last 10 years...?

Re: It makes perfect sense...

"who built it thin-provisioned the LUN"

What a shame, as the BI server would have continued happily had the 'thick provisioned' LUN filled up....!

Doh...

Don't bother competing with ViPR, NetApp - it's not actually that relevant

Hi unredeemed,

Can you please advise which specific workloads HDS VSP, HP 3Par etc are good for?