Boston Metro-West Tweetup Framingham, MA Feb 10
Corporate Event Providence, RI Feb 11
Microsoft MVP Summit 2010 Seattle, WA Feb 15
HP Blade Tech Day Houston, TX Feb 25
Tech Field Day Boston Boston, MA Apr 8
  • <insert form letter>

    But Stephen, how could you have overlooked <company>'s introduction of <product model> <version number> in <year>?

    Clearly this list is not complete without <company>'s <product model>.
  • Nice job - a great lineup of products., truly representative of the evolution of the industry.

    One small point of clarification - today Symmetrix DMX's do indeed support RAID 5 (and RAID 6).

    And I totally agree with your decision to ignore <company's> <product model> <version number> in <year>!
  • I have to disagree with your decision to ignore <company>'s <product model> <version number>. Don't forget that in <year>, <analyst name> from claimed it was <superlative> <adjective> <noun> in its market.
  • Not that I would DARE to correct Mr. Burke about EMC products, but the DMX doesn't really do true RAID-5 since it still uses hypers rather than whole disks. Not that this is a bad thing, mind you - it's actually very very sensible!
  • Hnmmm...I failed to see that requirement in the definitions of RAID. But no matter, the fact is that for any given drive in a 7+1 set, ALL of the hypers on that drive must in fact be ONLY on one of the other 7 drives. Sure, you can also have 3+1, 1+1 and 6+2 hypers on that given drive, but all of their members must also be only on the same 8 drives.

    So, if you create ONLY 7+1 RAID sets on a group of 8 drives, all the hypers will only be on those 8 drives, thereby matching the requirement that you defined for "TRUE" RAID 5.

    No?.
  • Stephen,

    I have a different take. I put this on Marc's blog too - sorry for the redundancy - but isn't that important in storage ;)

    - Thin provisioning
    - Data De-duplication
    - Virtual volumes with large capacity pools
    - Writeable snapshots
    - Large, scalable file systems
    - Storage virtualization - both the SVC and the USP-V
    - Object-based storage (still not living up to its promise)
    - Search and indexing of storage (also not living up to its promise)
    - Clustered storage
    - Global name space - having a single view and control of multiple file systems (also not living up to its potential)
    - Spinning down drives - this makes it 11 but I do think this adds value and is innovative. We need to reduce power and cooling and this impacts that with backup and archived data.
  • Tony,

    Excellent! I was planning "technologies" and "software" lists, and you're right there with about half of each!

    Except for thin provisioning! :-)

    Stephen
  • I have not much time, but I've got many useful things here, love it!
blog comments powered by Disqus
Improve the web with Nofollow Reciprocity.
  • Vimeo Videos