Comments on: Top Ten Innovative Enterprise Storage Hardware Products http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/ Understanding the accumulation of data Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:58:00 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: dds3_tapes http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-14060 dds3_tapes Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:04:32 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-14060 I have not much time, but I've got many useful things here, love it! I have not much time, but I've got many useful things here, love it!

]]> By: dds3_tapes http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-13869 dds3_tapes Sun, 15 Nov 2009 14:04:32 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-13869 I have not much time, but I've got many useful things here, love it! I have not much time, but I've got many useful things here, love it!

]]> By: Of Emulated Fibre Channel, Virtualization, And The Right Tool For The Job - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-12151 Of Emulated Fibre Channel, Virtualization, And The Right Tool For The Job - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:02:20 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-12151 [...] to pretend to be a single one. Data General implemented this with cache in their oh-so-clever HADA, further separating us from The True Disk. But the worst was EMC, with their fully-virtualized [...] [...] to pretend to be a single one. Data General implemented this with cache in their oh-so-clever HADA, further separating us from The True Disk. But the worst was EMC, with their fully-virtualized [...]

]]> By: Top Ten Coolest Enterprise Storage Flops - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-12071 Top Ten Coolest Enterprise Storage Flops - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:33:21 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-12071 [...] Centriplex and Harmonix, also deserve mention though the company proved its worth with its “best” Symmetrix a few years [...] [...] Centriplex and Harmonix, also deserve mention though the company proved its worth with its “best” Symmetrix a few years [...]

]]> By: sfoskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-12225 sfoskett Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:45:32 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-12225 Tony,<br><br>Excellent! I was planning "technologies" and "software" lists, and you're right there with about half of each!<br><br>Except for thin provisioning! :-)<br><br>Stephen Tony,

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

Except for thin provisioning! :-)

Stephen

]]> By: sfoskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-11889 sfoskett Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:45:32 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-11889 Tony,<br><br>Excellent! I was planning "technologies" and "software" lists, and you're right there with about half of each!<br><br>Except for thin provisioning! :-)<br><br>Stephen Tony,

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

Except for thin provisioning! :-)

Stephen

]]> By: Tony Asaro http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-11888 Tony Asaro Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:12:17 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-11888 Stephen,<br><br>I have a different take. I put this on Marc's blog too - sorry for the redundancy - but isn't that important in storage ;)<br><br>- Thin provisioning <br>- Data De-duplication<br>- Virtual volumes with large capacity pools<br>- Writeable snapshots<br>- Large, scalable file systems<br>- Storage virtualization - both the SVC and the USP-V<br>- Object-based storage (still not living up to its promise)<br>- Search and indexing of storage (also not living up to its promise)<br>- Clustered storage <br>- Global name space - having a single view and control of multiple file systems (also not living up to its potential)<br>- 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. 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.

]]> By: Real Innovation - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-11887 Real Innovation - Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:44:20 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-11887 [...] Most Innovative Storage Hardware Products - Which pieces of storage gear shook and shaped our world? How about EMC’s Symmetrix, DG’s CLARiiON, IBM’s RAMAC storage, DLT tape, the Auspex array, NetApp’s Filers, and Seagate’s ST-506? [...] [...] Most Innovative Storage Hardware Products – Which pieces of storage gear shook and shaped our world? How about EMC’s Symmetrix, DG’s CLARiiON, IBM’s RAMAC storage, DLT tape, the Auspex array, NetApp’s Filers, and Seagate’s ST-506? [...]

]]> By: the storage anarchist http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-11886 the storage anarchist Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:11:00 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-11886 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>No?. 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?.

]]> By: Louis Gray http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/11/15/top-ten-storage-hardware/comment-page-1/#comment-11885 Louis Gray Sun, 16 Nov 2008 06:11:26 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=1038#comment-11885 I have to disagree with your decision to ignore <company>'s <product model> <version number>. Don't forget that in <year>, <analyst name> from <big analyst firm> claimed it was <superlative> <adjective> <noun> in its market. I have to disagree with your decision to ignore <company>'s <product model> <version number>. Don't forget that in <year>, <analyst name> from <big analyst firm> claimed it was <superlative> <adjective> <noun> in its market.

]]>