100,000µs or above???
I think you need better storage if you have >100ms latency... =)
4 posts • joined 6 Feb 2015
<i> "I built a block-storage array using an old PC, a couple of HBAs and Linux about five years ago; it was an interesting little project..." </i> – for home use
I notice you didn't say that your whole company depends on this homegrown array.
You're absolutely right, with a little time and research, you can build anything. But what percentage of a company's development budget goes into building a storage array (the fun exciting part) vs. testing, documenting, fixing, supporting, upgrading and generally "doing the important stuff" ?
If that were true and storage was 1 nanoseconds to 50 nanoseconds, then the CPU or network would be the biggest bottleneck.
But that is not the case: storage is 1 millisecond to 10s of milliseconds, 10^6 times slower than nanoseconds.
That is why today, storage latency has such disproportional leverage over the application response and end-user experience.
[Disclosure: IBM FlashSystem employee]
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022