March 13, 2009 5:04 PM
Posted by: Dave Raffo
While most storage vendors have tempered expectations for early 2009, STEC is predicting a healthy expansion of its solid state drive (SSD) business for enterprise storage arrays.
STEC Thursday predicted its ZeusIOPS product for enterprise storage will command more revenue for the first six months of this year than it did in all of 2008. And STEC beat its projection of $50 million for 2008 by realizing $53 million in ZeusIOPS revenue.
If you’ve been following the storage industry lately, STEC’s optimism should be no surprise. Storage vendors have been lining up to offer ZeusIOPS SSDs in their arrays. EMC, Hitachi Data Systems, Sun, Hewlett-Packard and IBM are on board. Most of those vendors are just getting started. EMC, the first storage vendor to partner with STEC, sold every SSD it had last year according to EMC CEO Joe Tucci.
According to an STEC SEC filing, EMC accounted for 15.2% of STEC’s $227.4 million total revenue last year, which would put EMC’s piece of STEC revenue to $34.6 million. That’s the bulk of ZeusIOPS sale.
As Beth Pariseau’s story on SearchStorage today reveals, SSDs will remain a niche product in storage arrays until the cost comes down and management features improve. But sales will obviously get a boost this year from having more vendors pushing it.
STEC didn’t give many other details about its customers during its earnings conference call Thursday and has yet to officially confirm IBM or HP as OEM partners, but CEO Manouch Moshayedi did say ZeusIOPS revenue was split about evenly among Fibre Channel, SAS, and SATA interfaces.
Moshayedi also said STEC is cutting back on its DRAM product to concentrate on SSD for enterprise storage.
“ZeusIOPS is where we’re really putting all our emphasis,” he said.
Moshayedi doesn’t seem to expect a thaw in STEC’s relationship with Seagate now that the drive makers have dropped their lawsuits against each other. When asked if STEC might see Seagate as a partner, Moshayedi gave Seagate a cold shoulder.
“I think I am doing quite well by myself, without needing anyone else,” he said. “Our ZeusIOPS business is going through the roof. So I don’t need anyone else to help me with that. I’ve got the best customers in the world wanting my ZeusIOPS. Our ZeusIOPS is known to be the best drive out there. Everyone is trying to copy it. They have tried for two years, they have failed. And I think we will continue on just trucking with this product for the next few years until something else comes along.”
March 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
You know the drill–some stories you may have missed this week:
Looking for the latest storage news, trends and analysis? http://www.searchstorage.com/news.
March 11, 2009 8:01 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
, Strategic storage vendors
Sanrad, maker of the iSCSI storage virtualization gateway V-Switch and virtual server HA storage subsystem V-Stor, is adding a new quality of service feature to both its products.
Sanrad VP of product management Allon Cohen, “Storage-intensive I/O can be a barrier to virtualization of some applications.” The company’s quality of service aims to overcome that by letting users throttle and reserve bandwidth for the most performance-intensive applications. This is similar to features offered by array vendors such as EMC and Pillar Data Systems.
However, unlike those storage arrays, Sanrad’s first QoS release will allow for two levels of service only, according to type of disk. A SATA disk pool will have one quality of service and SAS another (arguably the difference in speed between these drives also provides service differences). In the next release, expected in a month or so, Cohen said, Sanrad will add the ability to prioritize LUN by LUN. Sanrad is also releasing an API so users can set policies and thresholds for dynamic monitoring systems.
The product is currently in beta with partners and will become available at the end of the quarter. Sanrad is formally announcing it in a couple of weeks. QoS will be a free feature included with Sanrad products and a free upgrade for existing users.
March 11, 2009 6:36 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
, solid state drives
, Strategic storage vendors
Eric Wolford with his lobster bib.
Riverbed held a roundtable discussion about the company (and some other topics) with journalists last night at Boston’s Oceanaire restaurant in Government Center. I sat next to Eric Wolford, Riverbed’s SVP of marketing and business development, and he opened a conversation by asking me “What’s hot?”
“Well,” I told him, “these days I sometimes feel like I’m writing for SearchSSD.com rather than SearchStorage.com.” I didn’t expect Riverbed to be getting into the solid-state disk game, but Wolford said there’s probably a place for SSDs in at least some of its WAN optimization products, too.
Wolford said some large Riverbed customers use Steelhead devices on both sides of the wire for replication. At extremely high bandwidth (OC12 and above), Wolford said SSDs could help keep up when large volumes of data hit the devices’ disks simultaneously.
“With large data center-to-data center replication, they sometimes need so many spindles there’s an opportunity for solid-state storage,” he said.
But he doesn’t see SSDs replacing spinning disk systems, for Riverbed or the industry at large. “It’ll give us a new high end,” he said. And, he added, “an enormous amount of our business is at the T1 level and there’s really no opportunity for it there.”
Wolford also gave me an update on the Atlas primary storage dedupe product Riverbed was originally going to ship this year but recently pushed out until 2010.
“We got critical feedback from alpha customers where they want to deploy [Atlas], but don’t want dependency on the Steelhead appliance.” Wolford said. So Riverbed is working on bundling the Steelhead functionality into the Atlas product itself.
Atlas will sit out of band, he said, “to the side” of the array and perform post-process dedupe. Wolford says customers are hot for primary storage data reduction, but most vendors still can’t deliver it at speeds fast enough for primary storage. “If the device is out of the path of hot data, the performance burden isn’t as extensive,” he said.
March 10, 2009 6:17 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
Storage and server virtualization
A recent report by Andrew Reichman at Forrester Research showed that among 124 surveyed IT decision-makers, incumbent vendors and Fibre Channel still dominate the in-use storage systems supporting VMware deployments. But, according to Reichman and another analyst specializing in VMware, the Burton Group’s Chris Wolf, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily how things should be.
According to the Forrester Report, users should “pick a vendor that offers thin provisioning, has deduplication on the road map, and has documented best practices in virtual environments.”
Some of these things, Reichman says, are harder to come by than you might think. “Especially clear best practices–it seems like vendors tiptoe around it, saying, ‘we can do whatever you need!’ and customers need more clarity,” he said.
Reichman also said he wanted more storage vendors to offer management console integration with VMware’s vCenter, the way Xiotech does with its Virtual View.
On the management console front, the Burton Group’s Wolf added that vendors who sell backup should be looking to consolidate VMware data protection features into the same software framework as array-based or network-based backup mechanisms.
“That integration is going to be important for backup products supporting a virtual environment,” he said.
Reichman’s survey found that most shops are sticking with an incumbent vendor for server virtualization deployments, and that that vendor is most often EMC. But Reichman also said that the survey is probably capturing the first wave of production deployments of VMware. As those deployments grow and become more complex, and as more storage vendors add new features to their products specifically to support virtual servers, users might be compelled to take a fresh look.
When they do, Reichman’s report urges users to consider Ethernet first rather than Fibre Channel, though he said Ethernet adoption may be driving primarily by Microsoft’s Hyper-V virtualization software rather than VMware, “which tends to either be protocol-agnostic or Fibre Channel-centric,” he said.
Wolf said there are a couple more virtual server-focused features he’d like to see vendors add as they try to market storage devices for virtual server support. One of them is array-level primary storage compression and dedupe, currently only offered in a handful of places like NetApp’s FAS systems, EMC’s newest Celerra products, and for nearline/archival file storage by startups StorWize and Ocarina. The other is more efficient deployment consolidation for things like patches on multiple virtual machine images.
“So you could deploy a patch one time and any dependent images automatically update as well–that’s the level of intelligence I’d like to see in the arrays,” he said.
March 9, 2009 7:10 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
According to a notice posted on Facebook’s official blog, a group of disk drives (a RAID group?) on what sounds like a clustered storage systems failed en masse over the weekend, causing 10 to 15% of user-uploaded photos to Facebook not to be available.
You may have noticed in the past day that some photos aren’t appearing or are displaying a “question mark” graphic when you go to view them. We have experienced some problems with our photo storage that affected between 10 to 15 percent of already uploaded photos. Don’t worry: Your photos are safe, and we are working to make them available again as soon as possible. We’ve already repaired about one-third of affected photos and expect to complete repairs on another third tonight.
Here’s what happened, and what we’re doing to fix the problem: During an otherwise routine software upgrade on Friday night, we ran into some problems with our photo storage and a few of the hard drives where we store photos apparently failed all at once. We’re trying to fully understand what happened, since simultaneous hardware failures like this are rare.
As high-profile sotrage outages go, this one doesn’t seem to be as severe as it could have been, at least not compared to other Web 2.0 services disasters like ma.gnolia, which wasn’t able to recover users’ bookmarks when its backups failed in January. According to Facebook’s post, users will not lose their pictures while they try to get the problem diagnosed and repaired, but won’t be able to view them until sometime next week–
We still have all your photos because we store them in a way that maintains multiple copies of the data in case of hardware failures like this. However, even though your photos are safe, we can’t serve photos off the affected storage volumes until they’re repaired. We’re working on them right now, but it will take some time because there’s so much data on them and the repair process largely involves copying huge amounts of data to new drives. This is why some photos aren’t showing up right now.
We’re restoring photos as we repair the hard drives, so some should be working again today and we should be back to normal by early next week. New photo uploads will continue to work properly during the repairs, because we write them to different storage volumes. Thanks for bearing with us while we return things to normal.
Storage Twitterers are skeptical about the cause of the problem. Tim Masters, Co-Founder of StorageMonkeys.com, wrote “Recovery will take until “early next week” after a “hard drive failure”? Wish I had that kind of SLA internally….most of us don’t get the luxury of a week to recover a LUN or a disk shelf…”
Bloggers who aren’t hard-bitten storage guys, meanwhile, had some praise for Facebook’s handling of the issue. “It’s good to know that Facebook maintains backups of all your data for situations like this…” wrote Adam Ostrow at Mashable.
Meanwhile, this isn’t the only tale of consumer-facing storage horror to surface on the Internet today. Gizmodo also reported the saga of Nicole, who was allegedly done wrong on the backup front by Best Buy’s Geek Squad.
“Best Buy charged Nicole $99 to backup her data but then replaced her hard drive without backing up a single byte,” Gizmodo’s Carey writes. “Nicole’s service contract clearly stated that Best Buy would perform the backup before any other service. Now Best Buy is claiming that her old hard drive is their property and that she has no right to the data that they failed to backup or restore.”
To me, Best Buy reserving some kind of property rights on the disk drive sounds like code for “it’s gone to our after-market resale disk drive repository in the sky, and we don’t know where it is.” I don’t think they’re witholding the information deliberately or maliciously (why voluntarily create a PR problem like this one?), but I also don’t think Nicole’s getting her data back.
With more and more digital data protection issues like this one falling into the laps of consumers, we are probably going to eventually–after a long, slow process of learning by painful experience–see an approach to this stuff more like that of enterprise storage and backup experts, none of whom I can imagine uploading a photo to Facebook or bringing a computer hard drive in for service anywhere without making their own backups first.
March 6, 2009 3:44 PM
Posted by: Dave Raffo
IDC’s storage tracker numbers released today shows an 0.5% year-over-year decline in worldwide external storage sales in the fourth quarter of 2008.
This was the first time external disk sales declined in more than five years, yet it’s hardly a surprise. Everybody knows spending dropped due to the economy late last year, and IDC already told us that PCs and servers revenues fell 1.9% in the fourth quarter. But the dynamics behind the storage decline are interesting.
NAS and iSCSI revenues continued to grow. NAS increased 8.6% over the previous year, and iSCSI was up 62%. However, Fibre Channel revenue declined 3.2%.
With smaller installed bases, NAS and iSCSI have been growing faster than FC, but FC had been growing as well. The decline of FC will likely continue in the short term, as current market conditions favor NAS and iSCSI over more expensive FC SANs.
“End users are looking for more economical ways to meet their growing storage needs as many IT budgets shrink due to the current economic conditions,” IDC research analyst for disk storage Liz Connor said in IDC’s press release. “FC SAN systems fulfill many high-end storage needs, but usually at a higher average price. However, iSCSI and NAS storage solution alternatives offer increased enterprise-level features at lower costs, and compel vendors to consider these technologies. Continued end user education, growing confidence in IP-based storage, increasing product sophistication, as well as a typically lower price point, result in increased adoption of iSCSI and NAS by many budget conscious end users.”
The trends Connor talks about are almost certain to continue for the rest of this year because spending isn’t likely to pick up before late 2008 at the earliest. But there’s no guarantee that FC sales will rise when storage spending does improve. A year from now, enhanced Ethernet will be here to power not only Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) but improve NAS and iSCSI as well. Emerging storage markets such Web 2.0, film/broadcast, video surveillance, and health care are dominated by organizations that deal with more files than Oracle databases. They can do just fine with NAS or IP SANs. The largest FC vertical, financial services, has been crippled by the economy.
So even when storage revenues start going up again, FC may not follow.
March 5, 2009 8:41 PM
Posted by: Beth Pariseau
NetApp chief technical architect Val Bercovici let slip on his blog that NetApp is planning a new interface for Windows users of NetApp filers, complete with screenshots and feature details.
The preview is in the second half of Bercovici’s post about an award NetApp won at VMWorld Europe. Apparently the judges deducted points for the management interface, so Bercovici responded with the big reveal of what’s coming soon.
…our newest customers or partners evaluating and deploying their FAS arrays one or two at a time also deserve a modern interface to help them come upto speed. In the 21st century, that interface is most commonly provided by an administrative workstation running Microsoft’s Windows GUI… NSM [NetApp System Manager] using the familiar Microsoft Management Console (MMC) interface with a clean and modern Windows 2008 Server look & feel.
He also includes a screencap of what the interface will look like, pointing out how systems are listed in the navigation tree with active-active pairs grouped together along with a list of their software services. NSM also integrates with the Windows System Tray to pop up ‘bubble alerts’ for health issues with the arrays, snapshot management, and auto discovery for authentication systems like Active Directory, among others.
Existing enterprise NetApp users say it probably won’t have much impact on their environments. “In general, a GUI is a sexy tool, that all vendors like to demonstrate but a “real/old fashioned” system engineer will use it not very often,” wrote Reinoud Reynders, IT manager for the University Hospitals of Leuven in Belgiumin, an email to Storage Soup. “For vendors, it’s very important that they have one (for pre-sales activities), but after that, the use is less important.”