How granular is your storage? This question is just as relevant today as when I first published this article in 2008!

Many storage challenges focus on correlating high-level uses of data (such as applications) with the nuts and bolts of storage infrastructure. These discussions often revolve around the conflict between data management, which demands an ever-smaller unit of management, and storage management, which benefits most from consolidation. Developing data management capability that is both granular enough for applications and scalable enough for storage is one key to the future of storage.

Storage Management: Scaling Up

As I discussed in a previous Sunday Series piece, Turning the Page on RAID, the data storage industry has traditionally focused on reducing granularity. Disk capacity has expanded, and RAID technology has multiplied this by combining multiple physical drive mechanisms into a single virtual one. Storage virtualization technologies, from the SAN to the server, have also often been touted primarily as a mechanism to reduce heterogeneity. From a technical perspective, therefore, granularity has been an obstacle to overcome.

The core organizational best practice for storage management is the reduction of complexity and the enforcement of standardization. Consolidation of storage arrays and file servers is a common goal, as IT seeks to benefit from economies of scale. The goal of both initiatives is the creation of a storage utility or managed storage service. This mirrors efforts on the server and network sides to consolidate and virtualize hardware.

Although both technological and organizational factors have traditionally driven granularity out of storage, this does not have to be the case. Virtual pools of storage are ideal for providing storage on demand, as disk-focused RAID groups give way to more flexible sub-disk storage arrangements. And an operational focus on standardized storage service offerings has the potential to enable scalable management of these smaller units.

Filing Service

File-based protocols would seem to have more potential for granular storage management, but they have been undermined by the hierarchical nature of modern file storage. Whether the connection to a file server uses NFS, CIFS, or AFP, the key unit of management is actually the shared directory, not the file. All files in the share \\firefly\backups would be located on the same server and would be managed as a unit.

NAS virtualization can change this somewhat, as can more specialized NAS servers. Although Microsoft DFS enables consolidation and virtualization of NAS shares, it does not allow subdivision of shares below the directory level – all files in a directory must be placed on the same server. Tricks like stubbing and links allow for some movement, but these do not solve the core issue. Specialized virtual NAS devices from F5 (the ARX, nee Acopia), NetApp, BlueArc, Symantec, and others have the ability to move files individually, providing as much a virtualized storage environment as any block-focused enterprise array. Avere is also beginning to talk about granular file management.

But even an ideal virtualized file server lacks the kind of granularity demanded by users. They care about data, not files, and most applications consolidate their data storage into a few files. Consider a database, for example, where users want each record treated uniquely but storage devices see just a few much larger files. We need a storage revolution, where someone creates an ideal storage platform in which each individual record or object includes custom metadata and is managed independently. This would truly be a massive change, however, and it is not clear that all applications will follow the object storage model of Google and Amazon.

Small is Beautiful

Barring a revolution in data management, our best hope is to allow greater granularity in storage management. As mentioned above, virtualization technology has the potential to enable management and protection of any unit of storage, right down to the individual block or record. But the reality of storage virtualization has not matched its promise.

What is needed is greater integration. Each layer of virtualization (file system, volume manager, hypervisor, network, array, and RAID) also hides necessary details from lower layers. Consider the case of a virtual server snapshot: The application and filesystem must be in a quiesced state to allow a snapshot to be taken at the storage level, but the storage array has no intrinsic information about how its capacity is used. A given LUN might contain dozens of servers on a shared VMFS volume, so all must be snapped together.

Integration can be enabled by sharing more information through APIs. VMware leverages Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Service (VSS) integration for shared storage so a VMFS snapshot can call the operating system and even applications (Windows Server 2003 only, for now) to prepare the data. Similarly, VSS can communicate directly with supported iSCSI and Fibre Channel arrays, calling a snapshot at the right moment. And Microsoft is, no doubt, enhancing VSS as we speak.

As virtualization technology matures, expect this type of integration to improve. We hope to see more APIs exposed by VMware and Microsoft, allowing communication up and down the stack to break through the information barrier. Imagine a future where a standard API like VSS can pass a message through VMware, Xen, and Hyper-V to the underlying storage array to initiate a snap. I predict that this kind of integration-enabled granularity is not too far off.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2011. | Granularity: The Hidden Challenge of Storage Management
This post was categorized as Computer History, Enterprise storage, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Who will power the enterprise? The smart money is betting on a few superpowers taking over.

After years spent focusing on personal technology, businesses are increasingly turning back to the enterprise. There are many reasons for this, but the biggest one is the poor economy. Individuals simply have less free cash to spend on gadgets and software, and the meagre profits are increasingly going into the pockets of a single company: Apple.

The corporate IT market is much more dynamic and competitive, with a few very large “superpower” companies discovering their power to drive purchasing decisions. If a supplier can create an integrated “stack” of hardware and software, they can push product purchases that might otherwise be overlooked or postponed. This is the main reason that enterprise IT acquisitions work so well: Where a small company must fight to sell their product, a large one can hitch it to a much more strategic sale and have it pulled along.

The old IBM model is the prototype, with that company once selling everything from office equipment to datacenter gear as well as the consulting and integration services to make it all work.

HP has spent almost two decades bulking up to become the new IBM, buying their way into open systems laptops, desktops, and servers (Compaq), networking (3Com), services (EDS), and storage (Compaq, LeftHand, Ibrix, and perhaps 3Par). HP has been remarkably proficient at executing on this enterprise plan: In talking to enterprise IT folks, I often hear IBM-esque sentiments regarding the new HP. They tell me they’re willing to give HP the benefit of the doubt when it comes to new technologies and products, buying on basis of the company’s reputation and ability to make everything work. This bodes well for the company’s post-Hurd future, and HP has the most-complete “enterprise stack” in the business.

But HP has a target on its back, pinned there by Dell. The folks from Round Rock believe they can be more efficient (and thus profitable) than HP in the same markets, and have been making moves to fortify their enterprise offerings. Dell was always more of a manufacturing than R&D business, but they have shown a desire to broaden their focus. Intrigued by the high-margin mid-enterprise storage business built from their EqualLogic acquisition and their success selling EMC storage, Dell is moving into the enterprise. They matched HP/EDS by purchasing Perot and have made smaller buys in storage (Ocarina, Exanet) as well as the big move for 3Par.

The next big emerging stack player is Oracle. The acquisition of Sun gave Oracle a strong hardware base to complement their command of enterprise software, and many expect further acquisitions. But Oracle is playing a different game than HP and Dell, focusing on the high-margin enterprise space and ignoring more competitive outlying areas. Many suspect the company might make a play in the network space (Brocade, Juniper, and F5 have been mentioned) but storage is possible as well. CEO Larry Ellison is a major investor in Pillar Data Systems, so many expect a spin-in here. But Oracle has the appetite for something much bigger, even EMC or NetApp.

Then there is Cisco, who have attempted to parlay their data center networking strength into a broader position. But Cisco’s halting moves into storage (Fibre Channel switching and SAN extension) did not displace the market leaders, and their server products (UCS) have not made much of a dent on HP, IBM, and Dell either. A solid partnership with EMC has delayed further forays into the enterprise storage market, and Cisco seems puzzlingly interested in low-margin access businesses (Linksys, Flip) and their Cius tablet.

There are other players in the enterprise space as well. EMC has diversified under CEO Joe Tucci, taking a dominant position in server virtualization (VMware) and making a strong enterprise security acquisition (RSA). But the many faces of enterprise storage remains EMC’s strength, and they seem content to partner with Cisco for a stack sale. Hitachi, NEC, and Fujitsu also offer varying enterprise hardware and software stacks, but their comparatively small sales presence in the US market limits their ability to execute. In the final analysis, only IBM, HP, Dell, and perhaps Oracle can claim to be enterprise IT superpowers at this point.

Image credit: Steam Engine by Stuck in Customs

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2010. | Meet the Enterprise IT Superpowers
This post was categorized as Computer History, Enterprise storage, Gestalt IT, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Update: @SSauer points out that this is vShield, and posted some information here: A New Generation of vShield Security Products

vSwitch, vNetwork, vShield?

Most hypervisor products include an internal virtual network switch, but VMware’s ESX has multiple choices. The original “dumb” virtual Ethernet switch was augmented by vSwitch back in the ESX 3 days, bringing more-advanced configuration options.VMware improved and renamed the vSwitch in vSphere 4, creating the vNetwork Standard Switch (vSS).

But it was the introduction of vNetwork Distributed Switch (vDS) in vSphere 4 that really set VMware’s network capabilities apart. The champion of this field is Cisco, whose Nexus 1000V virtual switch extends their NX-OS datacenter networking OS right into the ESX world.

The Cisco Nexus 1000V runs both the supervisor and Ethernet modules inside the virtual ESX environment

As illustrated above, the Nexus 1000v consists of two key components:

1. The Virtual Supervisor Module is an implementation of NX-OS on an ESX virtual machine, and provides the interface and configuration of the virtual network
2. The Virtual Ethernet Module runs at a lower level in ESX, replacing the vSwitch for networking between VMs

One can think of the Cisco Nexus 1000v as a specialized replacement for the more-generic vNetwork Distributed Switch. Both include plug-in vSwitch replacements and centralized management, and both implement more-advanced network protocols like private VLANS and receive-rate limiting as well as supporting vMotion. But Cisco’s 1000v goes much further, adding PortChannel, LACP, security and QoS, and advanced management features.

See this comparison of vSwitch, vSS, vDS, and 1000v as well as Rich Brambley’s vSS/vDS post

From a technology standpoint, the key to both vDS and 1000v is the ability to replace the core ESX vSwitch with a more-capable alternative. Now let’s turn to what VMware might be introducing next.

What Do We Know?

Howie Xu, VMware Director of R&D, released a video discussing his sessions at VMworld, entitled ”The Future Direction of Networking Virtualization” (TA8361). This video begins with a quick pan past Xu’s whiteboard (pictured below) and includes a discussion of the state of the art, vision, and product and technology roadmap for VMware’s networking-related efforts.

The part that really piqued my interest was later in the video, when Xu talks about creating a “networking virtual chassis or hypervisor” to allow third-parties to develop and roll-out advanced networking devices within vSphere. VMware has already steamrolled through the heart of server-based applications, making VMware-based virtual appliances as common an installation format as the DVD. Now the company is turning its attention to the network. This is huge!

Xu speaks of both a platform and a service to support this ”open extensible networking virtual chassis platform,” and goes on to suggest that it could be used by “networking security, load balance, application acceleration, IP address management, and performance management” products. The virtual appliance marketplace is already populated by the familiar names in networking, from F5 to Bluecoat to Checkpoint. Therefore, VMware must be talking about something much deeper and more advanced than merely encouraging the creation of more virtual appliances!

The core question is whether VMware is opening up the “green box” in my diagram above to run third-party applications and what level of system access they will get.

Consider this a vFabric pre-intro!

Then there is the name. The whiteboard prominently includes the words, “vFabric Intro” in the corner. Judging by the rest of the readable content, this indicates that this new technology will indeed be called “vFabric” as Stu speculated.

Update: It appears that vFabric is not the name of this virtual chassis (thanks, Stu and Howie!). Good thing, too, since the name, “vFabric” is a registered trademark of QLogic Corporation, for “computer software for managing computer hardware, namely switches used in networks.”

What’s Coming?

I’m more of a storage guy, so I rang up my friend Greg “Etherealmind” Ferro and ran some ideas past him. Greg and I talked about the needs of network-based devices, and how they differ from traditional server-based applications.

Greg suggests that vFabric will really assist vMotion

Networkers have been conditioned with the belief that custom silicon is the best way to achieve low latency and high performance for network devices. The same could be said of the storage world, where companies like HDS, 3PAR, and BlueArc pride themselves on their custom ASICs. But EMC, HP, and others are proving that Intel’s server-class CPUs and peripheral busses now have the guts to go head-to-head with custom silicon. The networking world is no different, with many newer companies basing their products around industry-standard hardware.

But deploying these systems in a virtual environment is more challenging. Can a virtual machine hypervisor prioritize threads for network devices? Can it handle the overhead related to networking operations in real-time? What happens in the event of a DDoS or network flood? Most network devices run real-time operating systems like VxWorks or QNX to ensure packet throughput, but virtual environments are notorious for “overflow” of I/O or CPU load between guest machines.

The whiteboard provides some hints as to how VMware will tackle these issues. First, we spot the term, “latency-aware queueing,” which suggests that a mechanism will monitor the hypervisor and alter the queues for virtual network devices as the load changes. As latency rises, the hypervisor can move workloads to different processor cores or even alternate hardware using vMotion. We also spot a reference to “non-blocking”, suggesting an asynchronous I/O mechanism will reduce the likelihood that one of these virtual network devices will have to wait for data.

Both of these technologies are hallmarks of real-time operating systems (RTOS), and are critical to the design of scalable hypervisors like VMware’s ESX. It is likely that the company is developing an advanced hypervisor environment for these specialized devices, an evolution of vDS and the API that allows the Cisco Nexus 1000v to run its Virtual Ethernet Module.

Stephen’s Stance

If our assumptions are true, then this is an exciting development indeed. If VMware exposes the “green box” in our diagram above to third-party developers, we could see an entirely new and more-powerful ecosystem evolve around VMware vSphere. Running virtual network devices in a quasi-real-time environment will enable even-greater integration and flexibility.

The Nexus 1000v has not eliminated purchasing of Cisco hardware, and vFabric will not destroy the larger network device market. But we expect wide vendor support for the concept, especially those involved in lower-end and remote-office applications. We would love to see Palo Alto Networks, Infoblox, SolarWinds, and Vyatta, to name a few, developing next-generation applications for vFabric. Virtualization-aware integrated networking shouldn’t be the sole domain of Cisco.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2010. | A VMware Hypervisor For Networkers?
This post was categorized as Computer History, Enterprise storage, Everything, Gestalt IT, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Tech Field Day 101

Tech Field Day is a series of events organized by me, put on by professionals, but catalyzed by a group of loosely-affiliated volunteers. We bring a dozen or so hand-picked “delegates” to a city to meet with a half-dozen interesting IT technology companies. The last Field Day was in Boston, and we were in San Jose before that. We’ll be returning to San Jose for two more events in 2010: A networking-focused Field Day in September and another “gestalt” Field Day event in November.

One critical aspect is the selection of the delegates who get to attend, all expenses paid. It’s like setting up a dinner party: We have to get the right mix of focus areas, geographies, and personalities to make it work out. There are three most-desirable attributes for a delegate: Independence and an open mind, technical knowledge, and community leadership. Everyone we’ve brought in so far has certainly excelled in these areas!

The whole event is run as a cooperative endeavor rather than a corporate event. We’re trying to keep things a bit loose and fun, though we have to run a tight ship when it comes to the business of travel and logistics. The presenting sponsors have really grasped this concept, too, bringing their best and brightest for some rip-roaring discussions.

What’s In Store: Seattle

The Seattle event will center on the Microsoft campus, with 2/3 of the sessions held in their Partner Developer Center in Redmond. It’s here that we’ll hear from Compellent and Veeam, as well as a brand new company launching at the event on Thursday. We will also travel to the Seattle-area offices of F5 and NEC America.

One concern voiced by many was that companies were hiring up all the good independents. I’m glad to report that this is not the case. In fact, we’ve never had such a diverse mix of delegates, most of whom are new to the Field Day experience! There’s networking expert Ethan Banks, virtualization gurus Jason Boche, “Rodos” Haywood, and Craig Stewart, and familiar storage faces Ilja Coolen and Howard Marks. We’ve also got Kevin “Blades Made Simple” Houston, W. Curtis “Mr. Backup” Preston, and Bob “The Lone Sysadmin” Plankers. Making repeat Redmond pilgrimages are John “Absolutely Windows” Obeto and fellow storage MVP, Derek Schauland. Every one of these folks is respected for his technical knowledge, opinionated yet open-minded, and renouned for his support of the IT community.

The delegate group will be gathering Wednesday night to get to know one another before diving into two packed days of briefings, feedback, and roundtable discussions. As is our Field Day tradition, delegates, sponsors, and friends will come together Thursday night for an informal evening party. The signature local spot this time around is the Red Barn that served as the first manufacturing site for aircraft giant, Boeing. We also have some informal activities planned in the Seattle area before and after the event.

Follow Along

I encourage you to follow the action this week. We’ll be tweeting using the #TechFieldDay hashtag, or you can follow the entire delegate roster and presenting sponsors using our Twitter lists. Video is an important component, and we will be uploading to both Vimeo and YouTube as well as experimenting with live videocasting on Justin.tv. Blog posts and other long content will be noted in our Seattle Field Day Links page as well as on Posterous, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Look for Field Day photos on Flickr, too, and subscribe to our Roundtable Podcast on iTunes. Whew!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2010. | Live This Week: Gestalt IT Tech Field Day Seattle
This post was categorized as Everything. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.