I wanted to drop some lines about new generation storage units on NetApp Q&A set last day. I think that there is a significant perception change on storage technologies today. I want to share this by simulating with transition scenario to external storage units and Storage Area Networking (SAN, Storage Area Network) concepts during 2000s.
During 2000s, technology has been diverting the users to external disc systems that can communicate with each other instead of keeping the data discs on the servers. We tried to adopt this concept firstly then tried to explain it to the customers. Companies like EMC, Hitachi were the leaders; other companies with wide product range such as HP, IBM was collaborating with these companies and trying to penetrate their mid-scale products into the market.
“Past external disc systems were EMC Symmetrix, HP AutoRAID, Compaq EMA and IBM Shark. Yes, “Back then, cabinet and systems were cream and white colour except IBM.”
The story that we used to tell is that; instead of keeping discs connected to a storage controller in a server, we used to suggest moving the controller to an external unit along with the discs. All in all, you create LUNs with discs in RAID structure; however since controller mechanism becomes independent, you can connect with any brand or model server that you want; you can share storage unit between the servers.
Of course, the structures based on this principle had passed through enormous technological innovations over a decade. 9.1 GB discs replaced with TB discs. 16 Gbps FC connections appeared; cache memories have reached from KB’s to TBs. It was not enough that disc spin at 15000 rpm, non-spinning SSD discs have emerged. However, they still do the same job. The difference is that there is an effort to set up software sets running on controllers but as long as we use same disc management and controller backup methodologies, there is not much to do. Snapshot is taken, replication is made between the systems; you can find all these features in any disc system today.
Updated versions of old fellas. EMC Symmetrix has become VMAX, during HP and Compaq marriage EMA and AutoRAID merged and became EVA, now it is launched as P6000 series, IBM Shark is marketed as DS8000 series. It seems that there is an agreement on colour issue.
I do not intend to denigrate these systems. Of course, these systems will continue to be used in many solutions in corporate IT infrastructures. However, considering all manufacturers, you can see that someone tries to make something different. EMC VNX, HP 3PAR, IBM Storwize and NetApp FAS series storage units are representatives of this approach.
What is the difference then? First of all, marketing words are attractive. Unification), virtualization and big data became the common jargon. Though, same words do not perform same job but concepts are more or less the same.
Here comes the new generation. EMC VNX, HP 3PAR, IBM Storwize and NetApp FAS systems. While EMC tries to create a visual difference with a blue touch; HP attracts with yellow band. IBM stays at its classical status, NetApp is at grafite tone rather than black.
I will leave detailed explanation of each technology to my technology advisor and OEM representative colleagues. However, looking at each technically; you may see the difference between standardized systems; these systems store data after they filter them. Of course, this is possible since processor performances used on disc controllers are superior. Processors can process the data through the traffic between data and disc without any flow interruption. Since singularization, layering, data lock, block-based and file system-based protocols can be used on processed data all together; other brand disc systems capacities can be used as if their capacities and data can backup itself. We can take advantage of such features. Here, limit is defined by imagination and software abilities.
You can look at from a different perspective as well. All three new generation smart disc systems except HP use Intel architecture processor on their controllers. In other words, these controllers are a host which can make very quick I/O. Consequently, you can run software that you can easily modify on that pseudo-host controller. These operations can be run by ASICs specially manufactured by HP 3PAR, but logic is almost same. Here we must do justice to IBM. They are the first applier of the idea of using host instead of storage controller by IBM 2105 Versatile Storage Server (VSS) that they produced in 1998. This system is the ancestor of IBM Shark system. In these systems, IBM’s RISC-based processors have been used and it is still same.
Although the inventor is IBM, in my opinion NetApp is the company that accelerated this idea. Normally, NetApp has drawn attention by operating Exchange 2003 in their systems in 2004 which does not operate NAS environment normally. Underlying technology is of course WAFL (Write Anywhere File Layout) file system that is being used by the system itself. To avoid any misunderstanding, it is not a file system that you introduce to WAFL servers. NetApp controllers use their disc pools by formatting them as WAFL; again raw disc storage is shown to host world; application or operating system conducts structuring on it as per its needs. NetApp controllers operate all smart operations on WAFL file system virtually. NetApp has about 100 software using advantages of this file system and operating on the controllers. NetApp representatives introduce themselves as a software company rather than a hardware company. You can create many successful solutions by this way. Another advantage of NetApp is that they have standard PCI-based expansion docks on the controllers. Therefore, you can plug in industrial standard PCI controllers on pseudo-host controllers to get benefit from very different I/O purpose connection and expansion possibilities.
When it comes to I/O, let’s mention about a different approach of HP in 3PAR. Similarly processor performance, connection speeds also reached very high levels. HP 3PAR family has gone into a different way from a cliché double controller philosophy in the classic systems. You can use supplemental controllers on the system not only for backup purpose but also for gaining additional performance. Actually, multiple controllers have been used for many years in monolithic disc systems. However, HP 3PAR enables connection between the controllers at a very wide width and very low delay and allows using sources as if they are their own sources. Difference between multiple controller approach in monolithic systems and HP 3PAR approach can be simulated with SMP and NUMA architecture on different hosts. HP uses the similar architecture in a subfamily product P4000 (former Lefthand).
I say, anymore great minds think alike. IBM’s Storwize family also supports controller expansion up to 4 controller couple. This value is expected to be 8 this year.
EMC’s VNX series also presents a unique design. First of all EMC combined former Clariion and Celerra families and created an approach that can submit SAN and NAS structures in an integrated manner. It is made by X-Blade components according to function that you demand structuring in VNX.
In brief, processor that you need or I/O hardware is added onto main controller units. EMC creates a solution with a product family in which you can customize at hardware level directly.
Products like Dell Compellent Storage Center and Sun ZFS Storage 7420 are also another new generation storage solutions. However, I don’t know them very well so I won’t make any comments on them.
I would like to conclude briefly: New generation has emerged since smart controllers are used in disc storage units. Of course, previous generation will continue to exist. If you plan to make an investment including corporate storage, I recommend you to consider new generation’s advantages. You should leave behind the templates dictated by the old generation. You don’t need to think about RAID groups, LUN’s, blocks, chunks anymore. It is a wrong statement anymore “More disc, quicker database I/O” for many systems. It is even not applicable.
We would be grateful to assist you about storage unit selection according to your IT solution. Please contact us via [email protected].
Note: I tried to mention aforesaid manufacturer names in alphabetical order. I would like to emphasize that I have no intention to point out a certain brand.
New Generation Disc Systems
I wanted to drop some lines about new generation storage units on NetApp Q&A set last day. I think that there is a significant perception change on storage technologies today. I want to share this by simulating with transition scenario to external storage units and Storage Area Networking (SAN, Storage Area Network) concepts during 2000s.
During 2000s, technology has been diverting the users to external disc systems that can communicate with each other instead of keeping the data discs on the servers. We tried to adopt this concept firstly then tried to explain it to the customers. Companies like EMC, Hitachi were the leaders; other companies with wide product range such as HP, IBM was collaborating with these companies and trying to penetrate their mid-scale products into the market.
“Past external disc systems were EMC Symmetrix, HP AutoRAID, Compaq EMA and IBM Shark. Yes, “Back then, cabinet and systems were cream and white colour except IBM.”
The story that we used to tell is that; instead of keeping discs connected to a storage controller in a server, we used to suggest moving the controller to an external unit along with the discs. All in all, you create LUNs with discs in RAID structure; however since controller mechanism becomes independent, you can connect with any brand or model server that you want; you can share storage unit between the servers.
Of course, the structures based on this principle had passed through enormous technological innovations over a decade. 9.1 GB discs replaced with TB discs. 16 Gbps FC connections appeared; cache memories have reached from KB’s to TBs. It was not enough that disc spin at 15000 rpm, non-spinning SSD discs have emerged. However, they still do the same job. The difference is that there is an effort to set up software sets running on controllers but as long as we use same disc management and controller backup methodologies, there is not much to do. Snapshot is taken, replication is made between the systems; you can find all these features in any disc system today.
Updated versions of old fellas. EMC Symmetrix has become VMAX, during HP and Compaq marriage EMA and AutoRAID merged and became EVA, now it is launched as P6000 series, IBM Shark is marketed as DS8000 series. It seems that there is an agreement on colour issue.
I do not intend to denigrate these systems. Of course, these systems will continue to be used in many solutions in corporate IT infrastructures. However, considering all manufacturers, you can see that someone tries to make something different. EMC VNX, HP 3PAR, IBM Storwize and NetApp FAS series storage units are representatives of this approach.
What is the difference then? First of all, marketing words are attractive. Unification), virtualization and big data became the common jargon. Though, same words do not perform same job but concepts are more or less the same.
Here comes the new generation. EMC VNX, HP 3PAR, IBM Storwize and NetApp FAS systems. While EMC tries to create a visual difference with a blue touch; HP attracts with yellow band. IBM stays at its classical status, NetApp is at grafite tone rather than black.
I will leave detailed explanation of each technology to my technology advisor and OEM representative colleagues. However, looking at each technically; you may see the difference between standardized systems; these systems store data after they filter them. Of course, this is possible since processor performances used on disc controllers are superior. Processors can process the data through the traffic between data and disc without any flow interruption. Since singularization, layering, data lock, block-based and file system-based protocols can be used on processed data all together; other brand disc systems capacities can be used as if their capacities and data can backup itself. We can take advantage of such features. Here, limit is defined by imagination and software abilities.
You can look at from a different perspective as well. All three new generation smart disc systems except HP use Intel architecture processor on their controllers. In other words, these controllers are a host which can make very quick I/O. Consequently, you can run software that you can easily modify on that pseudo-host controller. These operations can be run by ASICs specially manufactured by HP 3PAR, but logic is almost same. Here we must do justice to IBM. They are the first applier of the idea of using host instead of storage controller by IBM 2105 Versatile Storage Server (VSS) that they produced in 1998. This system is the ancestor of IBM Shark system. In these systems, IBM’s RISC-based processors have been used and it is still same.
Although the inventor is IBM, in my opinion NetApp is the company that accelerated this idea. Normally, NetApp has drawn attention by operating Exchange 2003 in their systems in 2004 which does not operate NAS environment normally. Underlying technology is of course WAFL (Write Anywhere File Layout) file system that is being used by the system itself. To avoid any misunderstanding, it is not a file system that you introduce to WAFL servers. NetApp controllers use their disc pools by formatting them as WAFL; again raw disc storage is shown to host world; application or operating system conducts structuring on it as per its needs. NetApp controllers operate all smart operations on WAFL file system virtually. NetApp has about 100 software using advantages of this file system and operating on the controllers. NetApp representatives introduce themselves as a software company rather than a hardware company. You can create many successful solutions by this way. Another advantage of NetApp is that they have standard PCI-based expansion docks on the controllers. Therefore, you can plug in industrial standard PCI controllers on pseudo-host controllers to get benefit from very different I/O purpose connection and expansion possibilities.
When it comes to I/O, let’s mention about a different approach of HP in 3PAR. Similarly processor performance, connection speeds also reached very high levels. HP 3PAR family has gone into a different way from a cliché double controller philosophy in the classic systems. You can use supplemental controllers on the system not only for backup purpose but also for gaining additional performance. Actually, multiple controllers have been used for many years in monolithic disc systems. However, HP 3PAR enables connection between the controllers at a very wide width and very low delay and allows using sources as if they are their own sources. Difference between multiple controller approach in monolithic systems and HP 3PAR approach can be simulated with SMP and NUMA architecture on different hosts. HP uses the similar architecture in a subfamily product P4000 (former Lefthand).
I say, anymore great minds think alike. IBM’s Storwize family also supports controller expansion up to 4 controller couple. This value is expected to be 8 this year.
EMC’s VNX series also presents a unique design. First of all EMC combined former Clariion and Celerra families and created an approach that can submit SAN and NAS structures in an integrated manner. It is made by X-Blade components according to function that you demand structuring in VNX.
In brief, processor that you need or I/O hardware is added onto main controller units. EMC creates a solution with a product family in which you can customize at hardware level directly.
Products like Dell Compellent Storage Center and Sun ZFS Storage 7420 are also another new generation storage solutions. However, I don’t know them very well so I won’t make any comments on them.
I would like to conclude briefly: New generation has emerged since smart controllers are used in disc storage units. Of course, previous generation will continue to exist. If you plan to make an investment including corporate storage, I recommend you to consider new generation’s advantages. You should leave behind the templates dictated by the old generation. You don’t need to think about RAID groups, LUN’s, blocks, chunks anymore. It is a wrong statement anymore “More disc, quicker database I/O” for many systems. It is even not applicable.
I list new generation disk systems below.
We would be grateful to assist you about storage unit selection according to your IT solution. Please contact us via [email protected].
Note: I tried to mention aforesaid manufacturer names in alphabetical order. I would like to emphasize that I have no intention to point out a certain brand.