spectra logic sweeps tape library awards managing the...

backup deduplication • Spectra logic SweepS tape library awardS

Castagna: silly surveys and

predictions

toigo: the black holes

of storage

buffington: Private cloud

backup needs to get better

boles: sMb products

boost isCsi technology

snaPshot: unified storage

best of both worlds?

Managing the information that drives the enterprise

Vol. 11 No. 10 December 2012Storage

Hot Technologies for 2013Find out which techs will reshape storage in 2013.

cloud file-Sharing and Sync ServiceS

Server-Side flaSh cache

SnapShot-baSed backupS

cloud-baSed diSaSter recovery

Storage SyStemS for virtual e nvironmentS

all-flaSh Storage arrayS

From our SponSorS

Silly SurveyS and predictionS

the black holeS of Storage

hot technologieS for 2013

State of backup deduplication

Spectra logic SweepS tape library

Quality awardS

private cloud backup needS to

get better

SMb productS booSt iScSi tech

unified Storage: beSt of both

worldS?

storAge n december 2012 3

editorial | rich castagna

It’s survey season once again, and it seems as if every vendor and analyst firm has some new tale to spin based on numbers gleaned from polling IT pros or perhaps just plucked out of thin air.

Try this one on for size: Gartner says 4.4 million IT jobs—1.9 million of them in the U.S.—will be created by 2015 in support of big data. Wow,

right? But wait, there’s more. The press release announcing this employment windfall goes on to say, “Every big data-related role in the U.S. will create em-ployment for three people outside of IT, so over the next four years a total of 6 million jobs in the U.S. will be generated by the information economy.”

So, something called “big data” that nobody seems to be able to actually de-fine will create millions of jobs in just a few years. For all we know, Gartner might be using a pretty loose definition of big data that could include hiring new baristas at the Starbucks where the software engineering team fuels up on Venti Americanos. Without some context, it’s kind of hard to evaluate Gart-ner’s prediction. I could tell you that small data is poised to create 10 million jobs by the end of 2013. I just made that up, but you get the point; and, by the way, it feels pretty good to make such sweeping, and positive, predictions.

But if you keep reading Gartner’s press release, you don’t get much of a chance to bask in the rosy glow of the prospect of widespread employment: “But there is a challenge. There is not enough talent in the industry. Our public and private education systems are failing us. Therefore, only one-third of the IT jobs will be filled.”

Oof! We just went from millions of new jobs to failing education systems

Surveys, predictions and other piffleVendors and their cohorts at the big IT think tanks offer a steady stream of predictions and survey data; but is any of it useful?

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2207915






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



in two paragraphs of a press release. Gartner giveth and Gartner taketh away, I guess.

So what’s the point of all this predicting and then hedging? I think they just like to say “big data” a lot, and make it sound like it’s more than just an IT thing—it’s woven into the fabric of our lives and if you want to be “there” and help create millions of jobs, you should buy a lot of big data stuff. Gartner’s beating that big data drum pretty relentlessly, which must be music to the ears of its storage and IT vendor clients.

All of that is a lot of prognosticating, so let’s get to the actual polling. Lately, a lot of storage vendors are conducting their own surveys: some are scientific, a few are science projects and others are pure sci-fi. But regardless of the cred-ibility and merits of vendor surveys, it’s interesting to observe the spin they put on the results. For example, if I sell storage systems and my survey reveals that 73% of companies don’t use storage, is that a good thing because I have a huge untapped market or bad news because nobody needs my product?

Symantec does a number of vendor surveys, including an annual disaster re-covery/data protection survey that typi-cally reveals that a huge number of re-sponding companies are playing Russian roulette with their data. But I’m guessing that from Symantec’s perspective, the more companies out there using prayer as their primary means of data protec-tion, the better. After all, Symantec has backup apps, archivers, replicators and just about every handy tool you’d want in your data protection kit.

Another vendor survey—this one conducted at VMworld by solid-state stor-age vendor STEC—notes that 62% of respondents have solid-state storage in-stalled. That makes it sound like a lot of solid-state storage has been sold and only 38% are doing without, and who knows how many of them are interested in flash? STEC’s release describing the results also says, “Just 5% believe SSDs provide a competitive advantage, while 60% cite higher IOPS and faster re-sponse time.” Speed thrills, but it seems that competitive advantage isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Still, the STEC vendor survey has no trouble seeing the silver lining: “These survey results reflect the belief that next-generation applications

a lot of storage vendors are conducting their own surveys: some are scientific, a few are science projects and others are pure sci-fi.

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/guides/Big-data-tutorial-Everything-you-need-to-know

http://www.stec-inc.com/press/articles/More_Than_Half_of_Survey_Respondents_at_VMworld_Europe_Have_SSDs_Deployed.pdf






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



across industries require enterprise SSDs with consistent, real-world perfor-mance so that companies can achieve higher IOPS and faster response times.”

OK, so if a survey shows that nobody’s using your product, it proves there’s a crying need for that product. And if a survey shows that everyone’s using your product, it proves there’s a crying need for more of your product. It’s a classic win-win … for the vendors at least. If you’re a user trying to figure out if you need the product and who’s using it, it’s not much help.

My favorite vendor survey tidbit comes from Symantec’s State of Informa-tion Survey: “Forty-two percent of business information is hard to find.” Does that mean nobody’s looking for the other 58%? n

Rich castagna is editorial director of TechTarget’s Storage Media Group.

mailto:rcastagna%40storagemagazine.com?subject=

So how much do you think you know about RAID?

Find Out For Yourself and Test Your Knowledge with Our Exclusive RAID Quiz!

And don’t forget to bookmark this page for future RAID-level reference.

The Web’s best resource on storage for SMBs

Test your knowledge at SearchSMBStorage.com/RAID_Quiz

Confusing

Hard to Remember

Useful

All of the above

Memorizing RAID leveldefinitions and knowing which

level does what can be:

http://searchsmbstorage.techtarget.com/quiz/RAID-data-storage-for-beginners-A-RAID-quiz






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


storage revolution | jon toigo

A reCent artiCLe in Nature should have all data storage watchers breathing a little easier. The story detailed the latest theo-ries from an astronomical study conducted by a group of re-searchers at Michigan State University establishing, among other things, that multiple black holes could keep company

within a cluster of the Milky Way galaxy without, you know, shredding the fab-ric of the universe.

The scientists reported the discovery of a pair of black holes in the M22 cluster (part of the Sagittarius constellation approximately 10,000 light years away), and presented data that there may be between five and 100 black holes in that same location. They further suggested that these phenomena may not be as quick to eject their brethren into open space at anything like the rate previ-ously thought—thereby reducing the likelihood, I suppose, that I’ll encounter a random black hole the next time I’m warping through the ether in my starship.

By now you must be asking yourself, “How does black-hole behavior theory relate to storage?”

Well, there are always lessons to be gleaned from nature, especially when it comes to data storage technology. Since the recession, and even a bit before the economy went south, we were seeing a lot of merger and acquisition activity in the storage realm. A lot of smaller innovators were gobbled up by big three-or-four-letter-goliath vendors (the metaphorical “black holes” in the storage universe).

The “knee nippers and ankle biters” like 3PAR, Data Domain, EqualLogic,

the black holes of storageNot-so-heavenly bodies are scooping up smaller data storage companies threatening innovation in the storage universe.

http://searchitchannel.techtarget.com/news/2240080354/Navigating-the-vendor-merger-and-acquisition-binge

http://searchitchannel.techtarget.com/news/2240080354/Navigating-the-vendor-merger-and-acquisition-binge






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



Isilon, Engenio, BlueArc, LeftHand Networks and many others went to the likes of Hewlett-Packard, NetApp, EMC, IBM and HDS. Sun/STK was ab-sorbed by Oracle and, as of this writing, rumors are flying about that NetApp might follow suit.

Below the level of the array, we witnessed disk drive makers Hitachi GST and Samsung HDD collapsing into the gravitational pull of Western Digital and Seagate, respectively. Along with Toshiba, that leaves us with three disk drive manufacturers.

In the wake of these acquisitions, and with the field of available sources for storage technology shrinking exponentially, many of us wondered whether consumers would ever again see a storage marketplace characterized by multi-ple sources of finished goods and com-ponentry, or any kind of significant innovation given the kind of de facto cartel that was forming. We could only hope that, as in prior theories around black holes, the industry would ex-plode in time, ejecting the big goliaths into space and opening up opportuni-ties for newer and perhaps more origi-nal thinking—sort of another big bang.

Now it seems that our black hole metaphor is a bit less encouraging. Sci-entists say the black holes may actually coexist peacefully for a very long time. Moreover, they speculate that the black holes may be transferring energy to adjacent stars, reducing their density and slowing their evolution as well as the production of surrounding planets. By a metaphorical extension to storage, it seems that a cartel of storage companies could potentially coexist for some time, increasing the heat around ideas and technologies that do little to reduce the cost or increase the efficiency of data storage infrastructure. We may be stuck with tactical ideas like deduplication, compression, thin provisioning and so on for the foreseeable future—ideas that don’t address the root causes of the explosion in storage capacity demand, but instead only provide temporary and short-lived relief from symptoms.

We’ll see some new cobbling together of technology in the kits offered by the Big Three or Big Four storage “black holes.” They’ve already taken the idea

below the level of the array, we witnessed disk drive makers hitachi gSt and Samsung hdd collapsing into the gravitational pull of western digital and Seagate, respectively.

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/2240113016/Top-data-storage-acquisitions-SSD-technology-in-demand

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/2240113016/Top-data-storage-acquisitions-SSD-technology-in-demand

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Use-green-data-storage-technologies-to-gain-power-efficiency

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Use-green-data-storage-technologies-to-gain-power-efficiency






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



advanced by X-IO and blended flash SSD read caching with hard disk opera-tions to improve IOPS per watt. And we hear EMC is actually incentivizing its sales force to promote Spectra Logic tape libraries to its clientele—a nod to the huge sucking sound we’ve been hearing isn’t just Hopkinton’s share of the storage market growing bigger relative to its fellow black holes, but EMC’s customers’ wallets emptying after years of practicing their vendor’s “disk for everything” dogma.

“A full suite of enterprise storage solutions,” to paraphrase EMC’s marketec-ture, must now include tape technology. Who knew?

Still, when you see the new hurdles that have impeded the expedient market delivery of plug-and-play Linear Tape File System (LTFS) mass storage reposi-tories—the effort to have SNIA sprinkle holy water on IBM’s code to produce the one true LTFS so IBM’s interests in the technology they developed are pre-served—you can’t help but wonder if the black holes aren’t slowing the evolu-tion of storage technology in general.

I console myself that all is not lost, that we’re not entering any sort of Dark Age in the history of storage. After all, the Michigan State scientists conceded their theories were just that: theory. In fact, the radio signals they’ve been ana-lyzing might not have been generated by black holes in the M22 cluster at all. They may be detecting the noise generated by galaxies that are some distance “in back of or behind” the M22 cluster, misreading the signals as the emana-tions of black holes.

The black holes of storage may not establish any sort of stable nexus, but may interact violently, building proprietary capabilities into their wares that lock in customers and lock out competition until, at last, they’re ejected from data centers into open space, enabling the evolution of new solar systems of storage wares from wannabe black holes.

You know: like the way it has been up ’til now. n

Jon William toigo is a 30-year IT veteran, CEO and managing principal of Toigo Partners Interna-tional, and chairman of the Data Management Institute.

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/news/2240035603/IBM-adds-Linear-Tape-File-System-support-larger-drives-to-tape-libraries

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/news/2240035603/IBM-adds-Linear-Tape-File-System-support-larger-drives-to-tape-libraries

mailto:[email protected]

www.oracle.com/storage






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?

cover art


by the storage staff

cover story | hot storage techs for 2013

our annuaL Hot data storage technologies forecast cites the practical applica-tions of techs that are available and ready now, rather than oohing and ahing over a list of science projects that may never leave the lab. That’s not to say our tech picks lack pizzazz; they represent some of the most exciting technologies that are at the core of data center transformation, including solid-state storage, storage clouds, virtualization and data protection.

In 2013, we think a lot of data storage shops will sidestep spinning disk in favor of all-flash arrays—the prices are plunging and the performance is jaw-dropping. Solid-state will also become a key tool for caching apps and data to

hot Storage techS for 2013these six storage technologies will play pivotal roles in transforming data centers.n All-flAsh storAge ArrAys

n cloud-bAsed dIsAster recovery

n snApshot-bAsed bAckups

n server-bAsed flAsh cAche

n storAge systems for vIrtuAl e nvIronments

n cloud-bAsed fIle-shArIng And sync servIces






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



help speed up hard disk systems.Cloud storage services will figure prominently in many companies’ disaster

recovery (DR) plans, offering inexpensive virtual collocations and near-instan-taneous recoveries. But as file share and sync services continue to proliferate, the cloud will also create a little stress for storage managers.

Nightlies and weeklies may disappear from many backup operations in the coming year as more companies turn to snapshot-based backups. And a lot of the data they’ll be backing up will be stored on systems specifically designed for virtualized server environments.

aLL-fLasH storage arraysWith price the major obstacle to implementing solid-state storage, arrays packed exclusively with flash have taken time to catch on. But a bevy of start-ups offering lower prices have made all-flash arrays a reality, and acquisitions by storage giants could push them even deeper into enterprises in the coming year.

Simply put, the need for speed has created a market for flash systems. Top-tier, all-solid-state drive (SSD) arrays can deliver 500,000 IOPS to 1,000,000 IOPS, and even “second-tier” arrays offer 100,000 IOPS to 200,000 IOPS at a fraction of the price for a top-tier box.

“When you think of an all-SSD array, you’re thinking about how you can pack the greatest amount of IOPS or storage performance into the smallest form and with the smallest investment,” said Jeff Byrne, a senior analyst and consultant at Hopkinton, Mass.-based Taneja Group.

The cost of an all-SSD array is exorbitantly high on a dollar-per-GB basis, but the scales tip in its favor if dollars per IOPS is the measurement. So the best use cases for all-SSD storage arrays are environments that rely on applications requiring sustained high performance.

“Those would be things like data analytics, digital imaging, [virtual desktop infrastructure] VDI, database applications, financial trading systems and gam-ing websites,” Byrne said. The applications also feature high transactional vol-ume and highly random I/O, which justifies the all-SSD array high cost per GB.

All-SSD storage platforms have come from startups, including Kaminario, Nimbus Data, Pure Storage, SolidFire, Skyera, Tegile Systems, Violin Memory and Whiptail Technologies, among others. But they’ll soon have company. EMC

http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/All-flash-array-products-take-aim-at-virtualisation-I-O-demands

http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/it-consulting/ssd-storage-finally-some-new-technology/






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



Corp. acquired XtremIO last May and plans to release its all-flash “Project X” system in mid-2013. And IBM is already in the market with a slate of all-flash systems it acquired when it bought Texas Memory Systems in August 2012.

Arrays from the top-tier vendors will set you back between $16 and $20 per GB. Midtier flash arrays still fetch a premium price at $3 to $8 per GB. Today’s enterprise spinning disk array prices are typically below $2 per GB.

grading last year’s predictionsour grade

2012’s Hot teCH tHe verdiCt

A+ multi-level cell (mlc) flash

We nailed this one. mlc has become the darling of flash storage vendors, with barely a single-level cell chip in sight these days.

B+ cloud gateway appliances

We probably would’ve earned a c+ at best, but then microsoft swooped in and gobbled up storsimple; is that a market maker or what?

B virtual storage appliances

hard to tell if this remains a cool idea for cheap networked storage, or if it finally got the attention of the big storage vendors.

B- Integrated cloud backup

A lot of backup apps say they can do it—link into the cloud and use it as a backup tier—but we don’t see a lot of users onboard yet.

C+ linear tape file system (ltfs)

did we vote with our hearts instead of our minds? We really thought ltfs would take off for archiving apps, but it’s still mostly a great idea.

C+ object-based storage

there’s still a lot more talk about object-based storage than action—maybe in 2013? 2014?






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



All-SSD storage vendors are working to bring down the cost of their arrays, as well as perfecting the overall array designs for greatest efficiency and cost effectiveness.

One way of reducing cost is by using multi-level cell (MLC) instead of the more expensive single-level cell (SLC) flash. SLC flash is more durable and reliable, with a lifecycle of a 100,000 write cycles. MLC has a lifecycle of ap-proximately 10,000 write cycles, but vendors have improved the performance and durability of MLC through software and better ways of writing data. Data reduction technologies can also help lower the price by effectively increasing the amount of usable storage space.

As flash prices drop and the use of MLC becomes more pervasive in 2013, we’ll see flash arrays move from niche environments to traditional enterprise applications, even replacing spinning disk systems.

CLoud-based disaster reCoveryCloud-based DR may be an ideal disaster-proofing option for both small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) and enterprise-scale companies. Any orga-nization can easily and inexpensively ship copies of its data to a cloud storage service. Using server virtualization, when local operations are disrupted, new virtual servers can be stood up in the cloud to access the stored data.

“Essentially, cloud-based disaster recovery takes traditional recovery assets, such as storage systems dedicated for data backup, and relocates them into a cloud-based storage environment provided by a third-party firm,” said Paul Kir-van, an independent consultant and DR expert.

Storage magazine’s recent Purchasing Intentions survey found companies are still approaching cloud storage with caution, but approximately 12% of re-spondents said they’re using the cloud for DR.

And a March 2012 Forrester Research Inc. survey commissioned by IBM noted that large organizations can benefit by looking to an outside cloud DR vendor. According to the Cambridge, Mass.-based research firm, 23% of en-terprises were expanding or upgrading implementations of cloud DR (also re-ferred to as disaster recovery as a service) or planning to implement it within 12 months.

Forrester also found that an additional 36% of those surveyed expressed in-terest in the technology, and that more than half of respondents considered it

http://searchsolidstatestorage.techtarget.com/definition/multi-level-cell-MLC

http://searchsolidstatestorage.techtarget.com/definition/single-level-cell-SLC-flash

http://searchdisasterrecovery.techtarget.com/feature/Disaster-recovery-in-the-cloud-explained

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Storage-budget-picture-brightens






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



a “top hardware/IT infrastructure priority.”“IT managers who have not yet investigated the possibility of sending some

of their recovery to the cloud are behind the times; it’s time to start planning,” Forrester concluded in its study.

Turning to an outside vendor can offer cloud DR users the freedom of not having to construct and maintain the infrastructure needed to support a DR plan, which can favor smaller organizations that may not have the staff or re-sources to build such a system on their own.

Kirvan said turning to cloud DR still requires resolving how data needs to be stored before taking action. That includes deciding whether to use synchro-nous or asynchronous replication to the cloud (which could be critical if band-width is at a premium), whether to retain any backup tapes that are in use and what type of data—for example, databases, applications or other critical infor-mation—should be copied to the cloud, he said.

“[Cloud-based DR services] provide a cost-effective secondary backup and recovery solution that supplements existing backup and recovery arrange-ments,” Kirvan said. “An ideal strategy is to establish a hybrid configuration that blends both on-site and cloud DR resources.”

snapsHot-based baCkupsThe integration of array-based snapshots with backup software allows users to manage snapshots as part of the backup process. Historically, array-based snapshots have relied on management software sold by the storage hardware vendor, and as such, had to be managed separately. In 2012 this changed, with a number of backup software vendors announcing the ability to manage array-based snapshots.

“More and more backup and recovery suites are including the capabilities to control and catalog array-based snapshots,” said Rachel Dines, an analyst at Forrester Research. “Furthermore, some solutions can recover individual files and objects from a snapshot. That means, for the first time, snapshots can be truly integrated into the data protection strategy.”

According to Greg Schulz, founder and analyst at Stillwater, Minn.-based StorageIO, this development addresses challenges users have faced when using each technology.

“The challenge with snaps has been managing what is protected, something

http://searchdisasterrecovery.techtarget.com/tutorial/Business-continuity-and-disaster-recovery-outsourcing-tutorial

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/tip/Storage-snapshot-technologies-in-data-backup-and-recovery






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



that legacy tools do a good job with,” Schulz said. “On the flip side, the chal-lenge with traditional backup is the time and resources needed to capture or collect the data and then copy it somewhere.”

Forrester Research’s Dines said that snapshot backup helps users meet backup windows and recover data faster—two issues IT pros have cited as a growing problems for years. “Snapshot backups allow users to virtually elimi-nate backup windows by taking a snapshot and using that as the backup,” she said. “Snapshot backups can also be rapidly mounted and used almost immedi-ately—much faster than restoring from a traditional backup.”

The concept of using snapshots as part of a data protection strategy isn’t new. Many IT shops have used array-based snapshots as a rapid recovery strat-egy while also creating backups of their data. However, the integration of snap-shot and backup allows users to streamline that approach.

“2012 and 2013 are important for snap-backs because the technology is now there for some vendors, and [early adopters] have seen the products mature,” Dines said. “The time is right to rethink backups using snap-backs as part of modernizing data protection to find and fix problems, rather than swapping out media like flat tires on a car.”

StorageIO’s Schulz agreed that snapshot backups were an important step toward modernizing data protection and said that “snapshot backups are, or should be, hot because they [enable users to] rethink how, when and what in-formation is protected.” He went on to say that the marriage of snapshot tech-nology with the management capabilities of backup software is a “perfect ex-ample of technology convergence” taking advantage of the best aspects of each.

server-based fLasH CaCHeServer-based flash cache became a hot topic in the storage world with the launch of EMC’s VFCache, and the performance-boosting technology picked up momentum as additional major vendors, such as Dell Inc. and NetApp Inc., unveiled similar offerings.

The push toward server-side flash cache by storage vendors essentially vali-dated the market staked out by trailblazers such as Fusion-io Inc., with its io-Turbine software for virtual environments and directCache for physical serv-ers, LSI Corp., OCZ Technology Group Inc., SanDisk Corp. and VeloBit Inc.

“It’s hot now, and it’s only going to get hotter because it’s a relatively simple

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/feature/Using-snapshot-backups-to-replace-your-traditional-data-backup-system

http://searchsolidstatestorage.techtarget.com/feature/EMC-challenges-Fusion-io-for-PCIe-flash-dominance






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



addition to a server,” said Dennis Martin, president at Demartek LLC in Ar-vada, Colo. “It doesn’t require application changes or changes to the back-end storage system, and it provides a significant boost in storage performance.”

Putting the cache in the application server rather than the storage system reduces the latency associated with the network hop. To further minimize la-tency, server-based flash caches often use PCI Express (PCIe) cards connected directly to the CPU and system memory rather than SAS/SATA-based SSDs. Caching software generally determines the most frequently accessed data and automatically shifts a copy to the flash cache. Algorithms differ by vendor, but read caches typically require a warm-up period to achieve optimal performance.

not-quite hot: 5 techs that aren’t quite readyup and Comers taking tHeir temperature

Big data storage We said last year that big data storage wasn’t quite ready for prime time … and we’re still waiting.

Data reduction in primary storage

yet another holdover from last year’s list. users want it, but vendors are dragging their feet—maybe dell and Ibm will take the lead in 2013.

Mobile device backup

this was on our not-quite list last year, too. We expected the whole bring-your-own-device movement to open some eyes about data protection. not yet …

Triple-level cell (TLC) flash

mlc was such a big hit in 2012, you’d think tlc flash would be hard on its heels, but cramming so much stuff into a chip isn’t easy.

Virtual I/O the new term for this is software-defined net-works (sdn), but whatever it’s called, we don’t see a lot of shops rethinking their networks.






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



For instance, EMC’s VFCache write-through, or read, cache might need 30 or 60 minutes to fill with data from an Oracle Corp. database. The initial data writes go from the application server to the storage array, and the PCIe card populates on an asynchronous basis to prevent application slowdown. I/O filter driver software, which installs on the server, determines if a data request can be fulfilled via the PCIe card.

Another, more complex type of server-based flash cache, such as Dell’s Fluid Cache (due out next year), aims to accelerate both the reads and the writes. A read/write cache is more work for the vendor than a read-only cache because the writes take place before the data is written to the back-end storage system and the software needs to ensure the data is protected, Martin said.

One of the key questions surrounding server-based caches is the degree to which they work with third-party storage systems. VFCache, for instance, tech-nically works with any server or external storage system, but EMC spelled out plans to deeply integrate the cache with its storage management and Fully Au-tomated Storage Tiering (FAST) technologies. Industry analysts expect most server-based flash cache software to ultimately work best and afford the most sophisticated features when used with the same vendor’s storage systems.

storage systems for virtuaL environmentsServer virtualization prompts organizations to adopt networked storage and pushes storage vendors to change the way storage is provisioned and managed. That trend is accelerating as virtual servers become more ingrained in the data center, virtualization spreads to desktops and VMware Inc. gives server admin-istrators more control over storage.

Major storage vendors are working more closely than ever with VMware to tie into its storage features, startups are developing storage systems that can be set up from within vCenter for easy provisioning and management, and con-verged stacks keep popping up to better integrate virtual machines (VMs) and storage.

More than ever, control of storage is being shared by virtual servers and server administrators. VMware is driving this trend with its virtual storage appliances (VSAs) and future features such as vFlash, vSAN and vVols.

Almost every storage vendor has changed the way its products are sold and managed as a result of server virtualization. The major storage vendors support

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/video/Dells-Project-Hermes-aims-to-move-flash-capacity-onto-the-server

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/report/Virtual-server-tutorial-Managing-a-server-virtualization-environment

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Storage-management-for-virtualized-servers

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Storage-management-for-virtualized-servers






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



vStorage APIs for Array Integration (VAAI) and are working on ways to pro-vision storage without LUNs, RAID groups and mount points. They also have reference architectures, integrated stacks or both that combine storage, com-pute, networking and server virtualization to make it easier for users to manage storage for VMs.

Startups Nutanix Inc., Scale Computing and SimpliVity Corp. sell what they call “hyper-converged” systems that put capacity, computing and pre-installed VMs in one box. Other newcomers, such as Tegile Systems Inc. and Tintri Inc. designed storage systems specifically to support VMs.

Adoption of another hot storage technology, solid-state, has been driven largely by the need for better storage performance for a VDI. Storage perfor-mance had been the biggest obstacle to implementing VDI, but companies are getting around that now by implementing SSDs in their storage arrays dedi-cated to virtual desktops.

VSA technology has been around for a while, with DataCore Software, Hewlett-Packard Co.’s LeftHand and others offering similar products for years. But VMware’s VSA push will likely prompt organizations to take a closer look. VSAs use a virtual machine in the host to connect to an onboard RAID control-ler and make that storage available to other hosts through iSCSI or NAS.

The need to manage storage for VMs has brought about a new industry buzz phrase, “software-defined storage,” a takeoff on software-defined networks. Software-defined storage has no agreed upon definition yet, but you can expect vendors to commonly use it to describe how they work with VMs.

CLoud-based fiLe-sHaring and synC serviCesFile-sharing and syncing services are growing at such a rate that more than 30 vendors now offer products. The driving force behind cloud-based file sharing is the mobile worker who is becoming more dependent on portable devices, such as smartphones and tablets. Those users want to collaborate and access documents stored on desktops or laptops using any mobile device, from any location at any time.

Companies like Box, Citrix’s ShareFile, Dropbox, Egnyte Inc., Nomadix Inc., SugarSync Inc., Syncplicity Inc. and YouSendit Inc. are some of the early companies to provide cloud-based apps that sync data from desktops, laptops and mobile devices for instant access or collaboration purposes.

http://searchvirtualdesktop.techtarget.com/guides/VDI-pilot-project-guide-How-to-ensure-VDI-implementation-success

http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/news/2240111622/VMware-vSphere-Storage-Appliance-Devils-in-the-details

http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/news/2240162860/Software-defined-storage-previews-intrigue-VMware-pros

http://searchcloudstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Everything-you-need-to-know-about-cloud-based-file-sharing






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



New companies continue to join the market. Startup Maginatics Inc. came out of stealth recently with its MagFS online file-sharing platform that uses a distributed file system and cloud storage so end users with multiple end-point devices can access data from a shared namespace. Nasuni Corp. and Scality are two of the latest vendors to deliver offerings as part of their larger platforms for cloud-based mobile access.

SMBs were the first to show interest in cloud file-sharing/syncing services, but now it’s pervasive in enterprises too. Egnyte CEO Vineet Jain said he’s finding interest in cloud file sharing from larger organization, prompting the launch of the company’s enterprise version, EgnytePlus, to increase syncing capabilities and support more users.

“We’re getting pulled more and more into larger enterprises,” Jain said.Like most cloud deployments, online file-sharing services can be imple-

mented in three ways: via public, private or hybrid models. File-sharing ven-dors offer a public option in which the provider takes full responsibility for the full service. Vendors also offer a software license option where users can in-stall their own hardware behind the firewall to ensure security. The hybrid ap-proach melds on-premises file sharing with a public cloud file-sharing service.

While many companies originally turned to cloud file sharing just to allow employees to access files remotely from smartphones and tablets, IT managers found that as an added benefit they could replace some on-premises file serv-ers. This reduces virtual private network (VPN) costs and the challenge of man-aging geographically remote workers.

It’s clear mobile devices are changing the way employees collaborate and ac-cess documents, and companies now are forced to accommodate this change. “The old way of file sharing doesn’t work for the mobile workforce,” said Terri McClure, a senior analyst at Milford, Mass.-based Enterprise Strategy Group. n

Andrew Burton, Rich Castagna, Todd Erickson, John Hilliard, Sonia Lelii, Dave Raffo and Carol Sliwa contributed to this article.

http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/tip/Enterprises-usher-in-mobile-cloud-computing

http://searchcloudstorage.techtarget.com/feature/File-sharing-in-the-cloud-enables-users-to-ditch-file-servers-VPNs






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

data dedupLiCation is the process of eliminating redundant data by comparing new segments with segments already stored and only keeping one copy. The technology can lead to a significant reduction in required storage space, espe-cially in situations where redundancy is high. As a result, data deduplication has firmly established itself in the backup market. But not every data center uses deduplication. For example, Storage magazine’s most recent Purchasing Intentions survey found that more than 60% of data centers haven’t added data deduplication technology to their backup operations.

by george Crump

data dedupe technology today and tomorrowit may seem like data deduplication for backup has been around forever, but it’s still an evolving technology, and there are plenty of companies that have yet to add dedupe to their backup operations.

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/tip/Dedupe-dos-and-donts-Data-deduplication-technology-best-practices








Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

dedupLiCation reLuCtanCeThe level of resistance to deduplication may come as a surprise to many in the storage industry. While it appears to be a maturing technology and the term “deduplication” is so commonly used, it’s easy to assume the technology is in use everywhere. The reality, as the survey shows, is that data deduplica-tion is still an emerging technology with plenty of market left to be captured. This is good news for vendors that are still trying to enter into or expand their presence in the purpose-built backup appliance (PBBA) market, and it’s what’s driving the next generation of deduplication devices.

WHere data dedupLiCation is todayBefore looking at the latest developments in data deduplication, it makes sense to look at the current state of deduplication and to understand the reasons behind the resistance. While some backup applications have added deduplica-tion capabilities, most companies begin to use the technology when it’s hosted on some sort of backup appliance or PBBA. This appliance typically comprises three parts: software, hardware and storage capacity. Data sent to the device is analyzed by the deduplication software as it’s received or after it’s stored, so redundant data can be identified and eliminated.

This process highlights many of the reasons for the lack of deduplication traction. First, the data center must have enough data to make buying a PBBA realistic. With hard drive capacities now reaching 3 TB to 4 TB, a small server with four or five of those drives may provide all the backup capacity a smaller data center needs without having to resort to deduplication or the expense of a PBBA.

Second, deduplication only provides a return if there’s redundant data being backed up. An increasing number of data centers are using some form of an in-cremental forever strategy like VMware’s Changed Block Tracking (CBT). Not only does CBT reduce the amount of data transferred, it significantly reduces the amount of redundant data that would be stored a second time.

Third, a lack of trust remains a big area of concern for data centers. Most deduplication technologies have been vetted, but as PBBAs grow in capacity, reliability and performance, problems can appear. The time it takes the dedu-plication engine to determine if data is redundant will impact performance and an inaccurate identification can lead to additional capacity being used anyway

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/Deduplication-best-practices-and-choosing-the-best-dedupe-technology

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/Deduplication-best-practices-and-choosing-the-best-dedupe-technology

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23703212

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/tip/The-value-of-VMwares-Changed-Block-Tracking-CBT






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

or worse if net new data isn’t properly stored.The reliability of the system and the data it stores is a big concern since data

deduplication is a technology that, by default, tries to not store data. A mistake could be catastrophic and many data centers still aren’t ready to put their trust in the technology.

Performance problems typically stem from a deduplication system not be-ing designed correctly. Deduplication lookups are a lot like traditional data-base lookups. The more deduplicated data a dedupe systems stores, the more lookups need to occur, and as more lookup processes occur it takes longer for new data to be written to the system. For these reasons most deduplication vendors try to store as much of their index as possible in DRAM, which helps performance but can increase the price of the PBBA. Even with more DRAM, as the unit scales in capacity, eventually the PBBA will begin caching some of its lookup index to disk, which hurts performance.

Some vendors are turning to solid-state drives (SSDs) to augment DRAM and help with lookup performance. The problem is that SSDs, while they can improve performance, add to the overall cost of the system. But again, as over-all system capacity scales, the problem may crop up again as operations out-grow the SSD capacity, causing the system to once again cache to hard disk.

dedupLiCation appLianCe aLternativesThe PBBA deduplication market has also been impacted by the growing suc-cess of the appliance vendors’ three biggest competitors: backup software, cloud storage and tape. It used to be that PBBA vendors and tape software ven-dors were best of friends and a perfect complement to each other. Then backup software developers began to develop their own deduplication code and add support for VMware’s CBT technologies. That means backup software could be coupled with just about any standalone disk array and be able to provide similar functionality to the PBBA.

There are limitations to the backup software approach. First, a user would have to commit fully to one software application to gain maximum deduplica-tion efficiency. This rarely happens in larger data centers as multiple backup solutions are used daily. Second, while backup software vendors like to justify the expense of their deduplication modules by coupling them with the cheap-est disk prices that can be found, an investment still has to be made in a reliable

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/feature/Restoring-deduped-data-in-deduplication-systems

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/feature/Restoring-deduped-data-in-deduplication-systems

http://www.storage-switzerland.com/Blog/Entries/2012/2/7_Purpose_Built_Backup_Appliance_Market_Continues_Rapid_Growth.html

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/news/2240033028/Data-dedupe-software-comes-of-age






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

disk platform. The absolute cheapest disk won’t be reliable enough for most data centers. Finally, there’s the unpredictability of backup server CPU loading and memory utilization when backup and dedupe are combined.

data dedupe in primary storageDeDupLICATIOn Isn’T useD by just backup appliances and backup apps; the technology is also finding its way into primary storage, but the require-ments are different. there’s not enough redundant data to deliver the high data reduction rate the backup process yields. Where backup dedu-plication usually produces an average 15:1 efficiency rate, primary stor-age may see a rate of 3:1 to 5:1, depending on the environment.

for hard disk drive (hdd)-based primary storage systems, this re-turn rate may not be worth the investment since the cost per gigabyte (gb) of hdd storage is already low. primary storage deduplication makes more sense in flash-based storage systems. While the efficiency rate of 3:1 to 5:1 is the same, the cost per gb of flash-based storage is 10x or more than the cost of an hdd system. In addition, flash-based systems typically have performance to spare, so they can handle the overhead of deduplication better than hdd-based systems.

scaling of the deduplication tablespace is more critical in primary storage systems because lookup time directly impacts application per-formance and user experience. vendors need to invest in ensuring that their deduplication algorithms are efficient because the deduplication technologies that were originally created for the backup process may not be viable for primary storage.

over time, as flash-based storage becomes more commonplace, ex-pect it to pull data deduplication adoption rates up, just as purpose-built backup appliances created the initial wave of deduplication adoption in the backup process. A key future strategy will be how to maintain de-duplicated data efficiency between primary and secondary tiers without re-inflating or un-deduplicating data as it moves between them. n

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/tip/Understanding-data-deduplication-for-primary-storage






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

Cloud storage is now a trusted backup target and many vendors have solved the challenge created by the limited bandwidth of the cloud by offering on-premises appliances for data centers that act as a cache for backup data that will ultimately go to a cloud storage service. In many cases, these systems store the local copy in its native, undeduplicated form; all subsequent copies are repli-cated to the cloud where they may or may not be deduplicated.

The cloud alternative brings a few additional features that are compelling. Cloud storage is a pay-as-you-grow type of arrangement where storage is paid for on a monthly basis, and users never have to experience the cost of a forklift upgrade. The second feature, which is growing in popularity, is the ability to start a server remotely, either on the on-premises appliance or in the cloud. This brings a new level of availability to busi-nesses that may not have invested in it in the past.

While cloud is relatively new, the other alternative—tape—is relatively old, at least in data center terms. Tape tech-nology is making a comeback as a new generation of IT professionals experience it for the first time. They’re finding tape has matured, and is now faster and more reliable than previous genera-tions. Tape has always enjoyed a cost-per-gigabyte advantage over disk—a gap that deduplication reduced to some extent. But with recent updates, tape has once again widened that price delta and is by far the most cost-effective backup storage media available.

tHe next generation of data dedupLiCationData deduplication vendors are adding capabilities to their products to help increase its adoption rate and to fight off challenges from alternatives like the cloud, tape and even regular disk in a server. PBBAs are evolving from just disk storage systems with deduplication software to truly complete data protection devices that can be integrated into applications and backup software for im-proved efficiency and management.

tape has enjoyed a cost-per-gigabyte advantage over disk, and with recent updates, it has once again widened that price delta and is by far the most cost-effective backup storage media available.

http://searchcloudstorage.techtarget.com/definition/cloud-storage-backup

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/tutorial/Tape-backup-technology-guide

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/tutorial/Tape-backup-technology-guide






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

■n improved accuracy. PBBA vendors are improving accuracy and efficiency by developing specific algorithms that understand how certain applications store data and how to best parse that data into segments that will correctly identify redundancy. This software integration also allows for certain applica-tions or backup software to directly control interactions with the PBBA so that two separate processes no longer need to be run. The application or backup software can trigger a backup to the device and then control which subcompo-nents will be replicated to another device off-site.

■n improved scalability. Some PBBA vendors are improving this integra-tion further by leveraging their supportive software modules to make sure that some deduplication preflight checking of data is done prior to sending that data across the network to eliminate obviously redundant data. This spreads the data deduplication processing workload between the application server and the deduplication appliance, which should lessen the load on the appliance and resolve some of the scaling issues mentioned earlier.

■n Cloud and tape integration. Cloud and even tape support are also on ap-pliance vendors’ integration lists. Many deduplication appliances can already replicate to an identical appliance. Now vendors are adding the ability to rep-licate their data to a cloud service, saving customers the cost and maintenance of a second system. It also keeps cloud providers from having to develop their own hybrid appliances.

In similar fashion, tape is being integrated into these devices as either a spill-over for additional capacity or to make an image copy of the PBBA in case of a disaster. The spillover integration is most interesting, as it slows the growth in the disk capacity of the appliance.

■n global deduplication. As noted earlier, deduplication is only efficient if redundant data is sent to it. The efficiency is reduced as more individual appli-ances are deployed because they can’t compare data segments with each other. Vendors are addressing this shortcoming by bringing a scale-out storage capa-bility to deduplication where a single, global deduplication process runs across all the systems. This allows for maximum identification opportunity while re-ducing costs.

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/definition/global-data-deduplication






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


data deduplication

■n better dedupe algorithms. Data deduplication technology vendors are also fine-tuning their deduplication algorithms so redundancy checking can be done more efficiently. These vendors are learning that the typical first-in/first-out process common in a caching environment isn’t appropriate for a dedupli-cation appliance. Better algorithms lead to devices that create smaller indexes, use less RAM and allow the system to scale to higher capacities.

■n virtualized pbbas. Finally, some PBBA providers are dropping the physi-cal appliance requirement and shifting to a software appliance option. This is the PBBA with deduplication delivered as a virtual machine allowing it to inte-grate directly into the environment with no physical installation, and no addi-tional power and cooling requirements.

A virtualized PBBA creates many new possibilities for PBBA vendors. They can move into smaller markets because the purchase price of the solution is sig-nificantly less than that of hardware-based products. They also allow the virtual appliance to be installed in the cloud so that users can replicate data to it. For larger enterprises, it makes branch-office deployment easier and less expensive since there’s no physical hardware to implement and maintain.

promising deveLopments for data dedupeBased on the current level of adoption, data deduplication for backup still has significant ground to gain in the data center. PBBAs with enhanced integra-tion to existing applications will broaden deduplication’s appeal by making the backup process less complicated. Virtualizing PBBAs and delivering them as virtual appliances will lower the cost of adoption and make them more af-fordable for smaller data centers. And integration with tape systems will make deduplication and PBBAs more cost effective for larger enterprises. Reducing complexity and cost are the keys to widespread adoption; as vendors continue to focus on these key areas, deduplication and deduplicating appliances will become the dominant first tier in data protection. n

geoRge cRump is president of Storage Switzerland, an IT analyst firm focused on storage and virtualization.

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/feature/Implementing-data-deduplication-technology-in-a-virtualized-environment






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


quality awards: tape libraries

by Rich Castagna

Spectra logic SnareS midrange and enterpriSe tape library awardSthe seventh edition of our Quality awards for tape libraries tallied tape users’ ratings for service and reliability, and spectra logic came out on top twice.

it seems WHen Spectra Logic Corp. is in it, the company wins it. The “it” in this case is the Storage magazine/SearchStorage.com Quality Awards for tape li-braries. After failing to garner enough responses to qualify for last year’s Qual-ity Awards, Spectra Logic came roaring back with top finishes in both the mid-range and enterprise tape library groups.

Spectra Logic prevailed over some very tough competition in both groups. Looking at this year’s results and those of the past six surveys, the broader story is how satisfied users are with their tape storage systems, underscoring how vendors continue to produce high-quality and innovative products.






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


OVeRALL RATInGsenTeRpRIse spectra logic had the highest overall average among our five enterprise finalists with a score of 6.84. it’s the second highest overall rating we’ve ever had for en-terprise tape libraries, trailing spectra’s own record of 7.40. this is the third time spectra collected enough responses to qualify, and the second time it’s won. oracle Corp. placed second with a solid 6.32 just ahead of ibM (6.28). ibM has finished in the top three in every Quality awards tape library survey to date. oracle’s performance is nearly as impressive, missing a top-three finish only once. all the vendors fared well, but the overall average rating was only the third highest to date. spectra logic dominated this time around with the highest score in every rating category, ranging from a 7.17 for initial product quality to a “low” of 6.59 for product features.

MIDRAnGe spectra logic’s performance in the midrange group—both past and present— is equally impressive: the company has received enough evaluations to make it into four midrange finalist lists and has won all four of those Quality awards. this time, spectra had to battle with ibM and hewlett-Packard (hP) Co., and in the end only 0.12 points separate those three. ibM continued its remarkable run of never finishing out of the top three for overall scores. all five vendors/product lines were strong, producing an overall average score that’s the highest we’ve ever seen for midrange tape libraries. unable to repeat its sweep of all five midrange tape storage systems ratings categories, spectra logic none-theless prevailed in three, with hP (initial product quality) and ibM (product reliability) taking top honors in the other two.


overall ratingS: enterpriSe tape librarieS

overall ratingS: midrange tape librarieS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.84

5.996.266.286.32

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.58

5.946.356.466.49

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.84

5.996.266.286.32

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.58

5.946.356.466.49

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/definition/tape-library






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


sALes-FORCe COMpeTenCeenTeRpRIse it’s been said many times that the sales process sets the table for the ensu-ing user/vendor relationship. With a 6.94 score in this category, spectra logic is showing off its sales support know-how. on the way to that score, spectra racked up two 7.00-plus ratings for statements related to having a knowledgeable sales team (7.24) and ease of negotiations (7.00). it just missed on two other statements with a pair of 6.94 ratings for being knowledgeable about its customers’ industries and businesses. ibM and hP tied for second with scores of 6.20, and they were the only other vendors to earn scores of 6.00 or higher on all six category statements. hP’s top mark (6.44) was for knowing its cus-tomers’ industries, while ibM’s was for having knowledgeable sales support teams (6.49).

MIDRAnGe spectra logic (6.66) also copped the sales crown among midrange tape library vendors, with ibM (6.39), Dell inc. (6.32) and hP (6.29) closely bunched behind. Proving that its sales expertise comes in both enterprise and midrange sizes, spectra scored highest for all category statements, showing particular strength once again with its sales sup-port teams (6.84) and for keeping customers’ interest foremost (6.78). ibM and Dell had all 6.00-plus ratings, with both tallying very consistent scores. ibM’s top mark was for knowing customers’ industries, and Dell’s highest rating came for sales support teams. the overall average for all five vendors/product lines in our survey was 6.28—the highest cumulative score across all Quality awards tape library surveys. hP was just a hair off the pace, with only one sub-6.00 score and a notable 6.67 for its support teams.


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.94

5.716.046.206.20

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Oracle

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.66

5.766.296.326.39

Spectra Logic

IBM

Dell

Hewlett-Packard

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.94

5.716.046.206.20

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Oracle

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.66

5.766.296.326.39

Spectra Logic

IBM

Dell

Hewlett-Packard

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

SaleS-force competence: enterpriSe tape librarieS

SaleS-force competence: midrange tape librarieS






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


InITIAL pRODuCT QuALITYenTeRpRIse the real experience with a tape storage system begins when the “power on” switch is pressed and the machine is put through its paces. spectra logic users rated their initial encounters very favorably, giving the vendor a resounding 7.17 category score with ratings of 7.00 or higher for all six category statements. that total has been topped only once by—you guessed it—spectra logic’s 7.50 a couple of surveys ago. but all the vendors and products did very well in this critical category, with second-place oracle (6.48) followed closely by ibM (6.44). the highest average statement score across all five vendors was a 6.63 for “this product is easy to use.” oracle’s strongest showing (6.64) was for products that require little daily intervention, while ibM’s top mark (6.55) was for ease of use.

MIDRAnGe hP prevailed in the midrange group for initial product quality with a 6.71 rating that handily outdistanced an extremely close gang of three, with only 0.06 points separating ibM, spectra and Dell, and oracle not far off the pace. hP nearly swept the category, yielding to spectra for “this product was easy to install” by a slim 0.04 margin. hP’s top grades were earned for ease of use (6.77) and easy configuration (6.76). all the products scored particularly well for ease of use and configuration, with the statement scores for all product lines ranging between 6.14 and 6.77 for an overall category aver-age of 6.53 for all five vendors—a testament to their impressive track records delivering quality products.


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

7.17

6.116.346.446.48

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.71

6.256.536.556.59

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Spectra Logic

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

initial product quality: enterpriSe tape librarieS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

7.17

6.116.346.446.48

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.71

6.256.536.556.59

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Spectra Logic

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

initial product quality: midrange tape librarieS

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/video/TechTalk-Analyst-Jon-Toigo-discusses-tape-media-today






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


pRODuCT FeATuResenTeRpRIse initial product quality provides the first impression, but a tape library’s fea-tures are its bottom line. spectra logic triumphed in this category again, but just barely, nosing out oracle 6.59 to 6.56—nearly a dead heat. oracle copped top grades for three statements: product scaling (6.83), an overall feature set that meets users’ needs (6.65) and providing adequate performance (6.62). spectra scored best on the other five state-ments, with a near-7.00 for loading and ejecting tapes efficiently (6.95). as a group, our vendors/products fared very well again with a cumulative average score of 6.43. hP’s best mark (6.60) was for overall feature set; ibM’s was for well-designed products (6.53); and Quantum Corp. ran up a 6.50 for efficient tape loading and ejecting.

MIDRAnGe spectra logic racked up another 6.59 to win the midrange group’s features category but its margin of victory was even tinier, just 0.02 over hP. those two vendors split the eight category statements with hP snagging the top spot for overall feature set, management features, user interface and performance. spectra rated best for loading/ejecting tape, interoperability, scaling and being well designed. ibM’s strong third-place finish was highlighted by a 6.71 for loading/ejecting efficiency; Dell’s fourth-place showing was bolstered by a sturdy 6.74 for features that meet users’ needs. the loading/ejecting statement scored highest across the board, and the overall average for all the products was 6.39, equal to last year’s high.


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.59

6.266.356.386.56

Spectra Logic

Oracle

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.59

5.996.346.476.57

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.59

6.266.356.386.56

Spectra Logic

Oracle

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.59

5.996.346.476.57

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

product featureS: midrange tape librarieS

product featureS: enterpriSe tape librarieS

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/news/2240162645/Todays-tape-market-offers-improved-data-access-and-integrity







Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


pRODuCT ReLIABILITYenTeRpRIse time is the true test of a tape library’s reliability. spectra logic users showed their overwhelming approval by grading the company’s enterprise libraries the highest for all seven statements in the product reliability category, including a couple of 7.06 scores for meeting service-level requirements and requiring few unplanned patches or updates. Well behind spectra logic’s category average (6.78), but with very respectable scores, were oracle (6.21) and ibM (6.20) finishing a close second and third, respectively. oracle’s best grade, 6.41, was for the service-level statement, while ibM’s top mark was for rarely being the cause of backup failures. hP, just behind ibM with a category score of 6.16, fared best on the service-level statement (6.42) as well.

MIDRAnGe ibM cruised to a category win for product reliability with high scores on all seven statements (tied by spectra logic on one). it’s the second time ibM has come in first in this category. ibM’s highest marks were earned for requiring few unplanned patches/updates (6.75) and rarely being the cause of backup failures (6.73). spectra edged out hP for second place, with its highest ratings coming on the service-level and unplanned patches statements; hP, just 0.02 behind spectra, also had its best scores for those two statements. Just a small gap separated Dell from the top three as it also finished with 6.00-plus scores for all category statements, including its highest tallies for requiring few unplanned patches and rarely causing backup failures.


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.78

5.986.166.206.21

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.55

5.796.266.356.37

IBM

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

product reliability: enterpriSe tape librarieS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.78

5.986.166.206.21

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

6.55

5.796.266.356.37

IBM

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

product reliability: midrange tape librarieS






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


TeCHnICAL suppORTenTeRpRIse Mechanical devices—including tape storage systems—will hiccup sooner or later, prompting a call to tech support. how a vendor’s support team performs can tilt the scales between a positive user experience and disappointment. spectra logic isn’t disappointing its users; it swept all eight tape storage system technical support state-ments with a staggering category average of 6.74. spectra was astonishingly consistent with scores ranging from 6.61 to 6.89. it got top marks for supplying support as specified in contracts and received three scores of 6.78 for ease of service, knowledgeable support personnel and user training. oracle’s second-place finish (6.29) came from high ratings for knowledgeable third-party partners (6.57) and support personnel (6.53). ibM’s highest score was also for the knowledgeable support personnel statement (6.38).

MIDRAnGe as a group, the midrange tape library vendors earned the highest average score for technical support that we’ve seen on any Quality awards survey. individually, kudos go to spectra logic once again, as it bested the field on all eight category state-ments on the way to a winning score of 6.74. all vendors and products were rated highly for providing support as contractually agreed, with spectra’s 6.89 leading the pack. ibM’s 6.47 was good for second place as its high scores were pulled down slightly by a some-what weaker rating for training—but with the exception of spectra, all the vendors re-ceived their lowest rating for the training statement. hP had all 6.00-plus scores, leading to its third-place finish highlighted by a 6.70 for delivering support as promised.


6.74

5.916.316.416.47

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.74

5.876.206.226.29

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

technical Support: enterpriSe tape librarieS

6.74

5.916.316.416.47

Spectra Logic

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Dell

Oracle

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.74

5.876.206.226.29

Spectra Logic

Oracle

IBM

Hewlett-Packard

Quantum

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.00

technical Support: midrange tape librarieS







Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


WOuLD YOu BuY THIs pRODuCT AGAIn?one of our final questions on the Quality awards surveys asks respondents to tell us if they would buy the product again given what they’ve experienced with it. often, the re-sults on this question don’t jibe with overall rankings and category scores, but this time around, the percent of “yes” responses hews fairly closely to the other survey results.


pRODuCTs In THe suRVeY the following vendors/model lines of enterprise-class and midrange tape libraries were included in this Quality awards survey. the total number of responses for each finalist is shown in parentheses.

enterprise Hewlett-Packard ESL/EML Series (43) • IBM TS3400 or TS3500 (52) • Oracle (Sun) StorageTek SL500/SL3000/SL8500 (38) • Overland Storage NEO 8000 Series* • Qualstar TLS or XLS Series* • Quantum Scalar i500/i2000/i6000 or PX720 (24) • Spectra Logic 64K/t120/t200/t380/t680/t950 or t-finity (17)

Midrange Dell PowerVault Tape Backup 124T/114T or TL4000/TL2000 or ML6000 Series (88) • Hewlett-Packard MSL Series (65) • IBM TS3100, TS3200 or TS3310 (52) • Oracle (Sun) StorageTek SL24 or SL48 (16) • Overland Storage NEO 200s/400s or NEO 2000e Series or NEO 4000e Series* • Qualstar RLS Series* • Quantum M Series, PX502, Scalar i40/i80 or Scalar 24/50* • Sony (all models)* • Spectra Logic 20K/T24/T50 (20) • Tandberg Data StorageLibrary T24/T40/T80/T120/T160 or StorageLoader Series*

* Received too few responses to be included among the finalists

ABOuT THe suRVeY the storage magazine/searchstorage.com Quality awards are designed to identify and recognize products that have proven their quality and reliability in actual use. Results are derived from a survey of qualified readers who assess products in five main categories: sales-force competence, initial product quality, product features, product reliability and technical support. our methodology incorporates statistically valid polling that eliminates market share as a factor. indeed, our objective is to identify the most reliable products on the market regardless of vendor name, reputation or size. Products are rated on a scale of 1.00 to 8.00, where 8.00 is the best score. a total of 378 respondents provided 468 tape library evaluations.

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Oracle

Quantum

Hewlett-Packard

Spectra Logic

IBM

Dell

Oracle

90%

71%76%

83%

88%

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

91%

56%

84%

88%

90%

enterpriSe tape librarieS: would you buy thiS product again?

Spectra Logic

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Oracle

Quantum

Hewlett-Packard

Spectra Logic

IBM

Dell

Oracle

90%

71%76%

83%

88%

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 20 40 60 80 100

91%

56%

84%

88%

90%midrange tape librarieS: would you buy thiS product again?

Rich castagna is editorial director of TechTarget’s Storage Media Group.

mailto:rcastagna%40storagemagazine.com?subject=






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


hot spots | jason buffington

private cloud backup needs to get betterThere are several ways to back up private cloud data, but none of them is ideal.

for years, miCrosoft’s model was “If we build it, someone else will back it up.” It resulted in backup vendors creating their own database agents for apps like Exchange and SharePoint and lots of third-party support disclaimers. So Microsoft created Volume Shadow Copy Service (VSS) as a framework that backup

and data storage vendors could use, and things started getting better. But VSS adoption was slow at first and allowed some latitude in its implementation, so Microsoft shipped its own backup product—System Center Data Protection Manager (SCDPM)—that gave users another choice. It also taught Microsoft quite a bit about backup in the real world, and VSS improved because of it. Today, almost every backup app for Windows starts with the VSS framework and builds on it.

Why the history lesson? Because some companies are regressing to an “if we launch new virtualized services, hopefully someone else may back it up” attitude as they adopt private cloud architectures. The challenge isn’t what a private or hybrid cloud architecture should look like, but the disconnect be-tween most private cloud implementations and backup applications and their inability to integrate.

A private cloud takes the resource-maximizing capabilities of a highly vir-tualized infrastructure and adds elasticity (based on load) while enabling new models for provisioning. In its most advanced models, virtualized services and applications are assigned a service-level agreement (SLA) or quality of service, e.g., gold, silver or bronze. Depending on the service rating, the underlying

http://searchdatabackup.techtarget.com/definition/VSS-based-backup

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/magazineContent/Integrated-cloud-backup?pageNo=1






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



infrastructure might use faster disk or provision more processors/memory and so on. That’s fine until it comes to backup.

There are a couple of common models for private cloud backup services today:

1. brute force: one size fits all and everything gets backed up. Data protection apps optimized for virtualization workloads often tout an auto-discovery fea-ture that essentially watches the hypervisor hosts and adds any newly created virtual machines to a default backup job. Where’s the service level in that ap-proach? In effect, auto-discovery jobs say, “No matter how you define the im-portance of those virtualized resources, it’s one size fits all for backing them up.” A little oversimplified maybe, but not by much.

2. manual backups: every backup is custom tailored, and everything gets the backups they need. In this case, the storage admin has traded up from the older methodologies of server and storage provisioning to a private cloud portal. Based on business needs, a self-service tool that abstracts most details can be used to find out within seconds what new virtualized services are being brought online. The admin then uses the backup tool’s interface, navigates to the pool of host servers managed by the private cloud, explicitly identifies the newly cre-ated resources, and configures the backup and recovery policies appropriate to that data or resource. It’s a wholly disconnected experience that’s essentially three steps forward and two steps back.

These alternatives are relative extremes, but there aren’t a lot of solutions in the middle ground. Instead, data protection and recovery SLAs should be attri-butes of the provisioning methodology.

■● With gold, silver and bronze service levels, bronze might be backed up weekly to disk and backups would expire after one year.■● Silver might be backed up every four hours to disk and weekly to tape, and have a three-year retention.■● Gold could be near-continuous protection with automatic replication to a secondary site for disaster recovery.

The challenge with this approach is that it requires extra levels of interac-tion that aren’t currently offered by most vendors or, in some cases, enabled

http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/tip/Backup-to-the-compute-cloud

http://searchcloudstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Cloud-storage-service-level-agreements-SLAs-specify-uptime-guarantees-but-not-data-availability






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



by the private cloud management stack. Since I picked on Microsoft initially, I’ll give them a nod for the System Center portfolio that includes private cloud provisioning (VMM) and monitoring tools (SCOM), but also includes DPM for backup and (most importantly) the System Center Orchestrator for automation.

Automation is the key. It requires private cloud portals to provide some extensibility so backup and other infrastructure support services have visibility into the defined tiers of service offered by the portal. In an ideal state, when service levels are defined, data protection SLAs should also be defined, similar to how both Microsoft and VMware allow additional wizards or tabs in their user interfaces for vendors to integrate with.

It also requires the runbook automation logic to provide interaction with the backup offering. For example, when the runbook for provisioning a new application is executed, backup configuration should simply be some of the steps. Within a runbook world, this is ideally done through an “integration pack” created by the backup vendor, but it can also be achieved through ge-neric insertions into a runbook automated workflow (which might simply run a command line) to execute the backup app’s functionality. The latter approach takes additional work on the part of the backup vendor and solid partnering by private cloud vendors in publishing best practice guides.

In a perfect world, visibility into the portal enables a “best” possible solution. While not perfect, augmenting one’s private cloud automation with backup vendors’ processes yields a “better” approach by aligning with the provision-ing process. Either of those approaches is better than the “good” approach used by smart IT pros who add integration on a case-by-case basis because it hasn’t been published by the vendors. And all of these processes are better than the one-size-fits-all or custom-tailored approaches that many private cloud infra-structures are dealing with today. n

Jason Buffington is a senior analyst at the Enterprise Strategy Group. He focuses primarily on data protection, Windows Server infrastructure, management and virtualization. He blogs at Centralized-Backup.com and tweets as @JBuff.

http://centralizedbackup.com/

http://centralizedbackup.com/

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jbuff






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


iScSi innovation coming from Smb productsDon’t look now, but a lot of storage system innovation is coming from midrange iSCSI vendors.

read/write | jeff boles

big enterprise storage iron has always hogged the data storage limelight. For many IT pros, the high end of the storage food chain—with its soaring throughput rates, huge disk counts and stunning performance—came to represent the entire storage market.

But times change, and that’s no longer the case. If you’ve followed some of the storage industry’s recent announcements and innovations, it’s clear the emphasis has shifted to iSCSI storage features and to vendors pursuing a far different market than the traditional enterprise.

As I’ve noted before, the small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) and small and medium-sized business (SMB) storage markets have become hot-beds of innovation for the industry. It hasn’t gone unnoticed that vendors are delivering a greater breadth of features in their storage systems, with capa-bilities ranging from auto-tiering to WAN optimization and serious storage management.

Most of the innovation is coming with iSCSI storage system implementa-tions. iSCSI now has an exceptional track record in this market, with Equal-Logic and LeftHand paving the way for iSCSI’s SMB/SME success. Meanwhile, the ability to do almost all storage operations in software, as well as deeply manipulate the TCP/IP-based I/O path, is giving vendors some serious room for innovation.

Let’s take a look at a few examples.

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/definition/iSCSI

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/feature/iSCSI-SAN-performance-remains-strong-after-10-years

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/2240157907/Dell-moves-into-storage-blades-with-EqualLogic-arrays

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/2240157907/Dell-moves-into-storage-blades-with-EqualLogic-arrays

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/1354183/HP-carves-up-blade-storage-with-LeftHand-software






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



american megatrends inc.’s (ami) stortrends. If you remember American Megatrends as a BIOS manufacturer, you might be surprised that it’s also in the iSCSI array business. We recently did some hands-on testing of its 3400i array. While offering a traditional dual-controller architecture with drive scal-ing, AMI has also built in some interesting innovations. One is dynamic auto-tiering with a twist: rather than just auto-tier between disk speeds, it carves up 15K disks into three zones and optimizes data placement on the disk, effectively short-stroking to give the hottest data the best performance. The company has some secret sauce for replication, too. AMI has added WAN optimization for replicated data with deduplication and compression that runs on the storage controller itself. This is normally a pricey third-party offering.

nexgen storage inc. NexGen has performance-accelerated its storage system using a combination of flash technology and rotating disk. NexGen’s approach involves parking all data on flash for maximum performance and then trickling cold data down to hard disk storage, while deduplicating the data to make the most of both storage tiers. But going beyond performance and capacity optimi-zation, NexGen delivers a unique “Storage QoS” feature that guarantees cer-tain levels of performance (IOPS) for a particular storage volume. Not many vendors in the iSCSI storage space can boast the performance or depth of stor-age interaction insight to make this happen. NexGen’s innovative approach should let it take on more workloads without administrators worrying about overloading their storage system.

scale Computing. Scale Computing started with a highly cost-effective scale-out iSCSI storage offering, including iSCSI and NAS, but recently turned its attention to “hyper-convergence.” Using its scale-out architecture and the flex-ibility of iSCSI, it’s built in a virtualization layer that allows virtual machines (VMs) to run on top of the storage nodes. iSCSI’s flexibility has allowed Scale Computing to pull off nifty tricks inside of its scale-out clusters to keep every-thing looking like one seamless entity with easy VM access from any cluster node. The Scale Computing cluster can still be used as standard iSCSI or file storage, even while running VMs.

iSCSI is a mature storage technology today, and those lacking iSCSI expe-rience may still have a few misconceptions about the technology. These key

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/news/2240110388/NexGen-emerges-with-virtual-machine-storage-system-with-QoS-twist






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?



points might help in determining whether iSCSI is a fit for your organization.

■● iSCSI is a fully mature and extremely efficient protocol. There’s often enough resident network interface card processing power and CPU cycles left over to make iSCSI performance adequate for almost any workload. And because it uses standard SCSI commands, you’ll find some of the broadest support for new VMware features that are increasingly based on standard SCSI interactions.■● Often, iSCSI can be deployed with better multipathing flexibility than other protocols, providing greater availability protection and bandwidth. It’s the closest you’ll get to a Fibre Channel (FC) SAN without FC.■● iSCSI does require some design considerations. It’s best to deploy iSCSI across dedicated switches that can isolate and protect your iSCSI SAN and allow you to effectively monitor traffic. Still, you probably won’t need spe-cialized storage aisles or other complexity—the switches can sit top of rack or right next to your iSCSI gear.

iSCSI storage systems are currently setting the pace for fast innovation and new feature introduction. That level of innovation can make it challenging to do head-to-head comparisons. You should first set your goals for performance and scalability, and then look at the broad landscape of iSCSI features to make your wish list. With the wide variety of offerings on the market and rapid inno-vation, chances are there’s an iSCSI vendor out there delivering a product that will help you cost-effectively extend the capabilities of your IT infrastructure. n

Jeff Boles is a senior analyst at Taneja Group.

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/podcast/Using-iSCSI-for-virtual-server-environments

http://searchvirtualstorage.techtarget.com/podcast/Using-iSCSI-for-virtual-server-environments

http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/iSCSI-implementation-How-to-design-deploy-an-iSCSI-SAN







Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


snapshot

Multiprotocol arrays favored for efficiency and conveniencearrays that combine block and file storage in a single box have been around for a while, but it seems as if they’re more popular now than ever before with 63% of our respondents reporting at least one multiprotocol array. but most shops have multiple unified storage systems: 44% have two to five systems, while 37% have six or more. users cite three main reasons for going multiprotocol: more efficient capacity utilization (31%), it’s cheaper to combine systems (29%) and maintaining one box is easier than two (27%). twenty-four percent of users replaced separate block and file arrays with a multiprotocol system, and 61% added a multiprotocol array to their already installed mix of file and block systems. on the question of which type of block—fibre Channel (fC) or isCsi—to combine with nas, our group was split pretty evenly: 66% have fC-nas combos and 61% run isCsi with their nas. how’s it all working out? Pretty well: on a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 is “very satisfied” our group grading averaged 4.1, with 42% rating their multiprotocol as a 5. —Rich Castagna

what haS been the greateSt benefit of the multiprotocol array in your Shop?

0 20 40 60 80 100

29% Cheaper to combine file and block in one box

27% Expected administration would be easier than managing two separate arrays

2% Didn’t have the space (or other resources) for two systems

11% Other

31% Needed to use capacity more efficiently

63%percent of reSpondentS have multiprotocol arrayS inStalled

what’S the main reaSon you Selected a multiprotocol array?

8% 37%

19%

28%

8%

We use disk capacity more efficiently

easier to manage than a dedicated file or block array

saved money

saved on space and

power

other

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/tip/Block-and-file-access-unite-with-multiprotocol-storage

http://searchsmbstorage.techtarget.com/feature/Multiprotocol-storage-explained






Quality awardS


get better



worldS?


sTORAGe MAGAzIne

eDITORIAL DIReCTORrich castagnasenIOR MAnAGInG eDITORkim hefnerexeCuTIVe eDITOR ellen o’brienCOnTRIBuTInG eDITORsJames damoulakis, steve duplessie, Jacob gsoedl

seARCHsTORAGe.COM

exeCuTIVe eDITOR ellen o’briensenIOR neWs DIReCTOR dave raffosenIOR neWs WRITeRsonia r. leliisenIOR WRITeR carol sliwasenIOR MAnAGInG eDITOR kim hefnerAssIsTAnT sITe eDITORIan crowley

seARCHCLOuDsTORAGe.COM

exeCuTIVe eDITOR ellen o’briensenIOR MAnAGInG eDITOR kim hefnerAssIsTAnT sITe eDITORIan crowley

seARCHDATABACkup.COM seARCHDIsAsTeRReCOVeRY.COM seARCHsMBsTORAGe.COM seARCHsOLIDsTATesTORAGe.COM

senIOR sITe eDITORAndrew burtonMAnAGInG eDITORed hannanAssOCIATe sITe eDITOR John hilliardFeATuRes WRITeRtodd erickson

seARCHVIRTuALsTORAGe.COM seARCHsTORAGeCHAnneL.COM

senIOR sITe eDITORsue troyAssIsTAnT sITe eDITORsarah Wilson

sTORAGe DeCIsIOnstechtarget conferencesDIReCTOR OF eDITORIAL eVenTs lindsay JeanlozeDITORIAL eVenTs MAnAGeRJacquelyn hinds

suBsCRIpTIOnswww.searchstorage.comstorage magazine 275 grove street newton, mA [email protected]

techtarget Inc. 275 grove street newton, mA 02466 www.techtarget.com

©2012 techtarget Inc. no part of this publication may be transmitted or reproduced in any form or by any means without written permission from the publisher. techtarget reprints are available through the ygs group.

About techtarget: techtarget publishes media for information technology professionals. more than 100 focused websites enable quick access to a deep store of news, advice and analysis about the technologies, products and processes crucial to your job. our live and virtual events give you direct access to independent expert commentary and advice. At It knowledge exchange, our social community, you can get advice and share solutions with peers and experts.

photograph on cover and page 11: iStockphoto

techtarget Storage media group

http://www.SearchStorage.com


http://www.theYGSgroup.com

spectra logic sweeps tape library awards managing the...

Documents