EMC VFCache is a Simple Read Cache

I was not pre-briefed on this product, and I’m not all that thrilled at the prospect of attending a launch webinar, so what you read here is based on my own research and reading of the available information as of this morning.

When EMC announced Project Lightning last year, company insiders expressed surprise to me. It seems that many had never heard of the project, and those that had didn’t think it was far enough along to be announced. I didn’t even bother to write about the Project Lightning announcement at the time. But today EMC unveils the production product that came out of Project Lightning.

VFCache is a filter driver that caches writes

EMC VFCache appears to be a simple and straightforward offering:

1. A PCIe SSD from Micron or LSI sits in the server and acts as a read cache to accelerate performance
2. EMC software also runs on the server, snooping on I/O and filling the cache with relevant data

There’s not a lot more to the product than that. EMC will sell the PCIe SSD and bundled software as VFCache, and will no doubt market the heck out of this product. Perhaps the only novel twist is the so-called “split-card” mode, which allows the card to act as a write cache. But EMC only supports this for transient “throwaway” data with direct attached storage (DAS) as a backend. There’s no way a conservative, enterprise focused company like EMC would risk sanctioning a writeback cache with no redundancy or data protection features.

VFCache uses a filter driver installed in the VM guest

Perhaps the biggest limitation of the initial VFCache offering is its limited applicability to enterprise server virtualization environments. VFCache uses a filter driver installed in each VM guest, and includes no hypervisor drivers though there is a vCenter plug-in. This makes VMware vMotion very tricky, involving scripting to remove and re-add storage. This means VMware SRM will not easily work, and there is no support for clustering, either.

This is no surprise, since VFCache appears to the host as a local storage volume (AKA, a disk drive or LUN) which would disappear if a virtual machine is moved to another server. Virsto solved this problem by virtualizing storage presentation to the hypervisor, and Fusion-io’s ioTurbine software does not interfere with vMotion either. EMC will likely go in this direction in the future, but it’s a big hole in the product for now.

You might also like reading Micron Bursts Into the PCIe SSD Market to learn more about the card EMC is using

The News: EMC Is in the Host-Based Storage Business

The primary use case for this product is server I/O acceleration. This is desperately needed, as applications and servers are rapidly outrunning the capabilities of conventional storage arrays. EMC and other legacy array manufacturers initially tried to address this I/O imbalance with tiered storage and in array caching. Indeed, these technologies are fairly effective at accelerating the performance of conventional disk storage arrays.

But flash manufacturers like Fusion-io (not to mention Micron and LSI) absolutely demolished storage array performance with their in-server offerings. EMC faced the prospect of losing out on the high-performance storage market. EMC simply could not allow their bread-and-butter enterprise customers to look elsewhere for strategic, high-performance storage for high-profile applications.

VFCache gives EMC salespeople a silver bullet when customers demand maximum performance, but this launch may not spell doom for the flash startups. For one thing, it legitimizes host-based flash cards as a viable component of enterprise storage architectures. It also opens the door to comparison between SAN storage and non–SAN alternatives that go well beyond what EMC is currently offering.

Shared Flash Storage Is on Deck: Project Thunder

"Project Thunder" will externalize the PCIe flash cards over a high-performance "Server Area Network"

As part of the VFCache introduction, EMC is also talking about Project Thunder, a shared version of VFCache. At the very least, thunder will allow multiple servers to access a shared pool of flash cache. This should allow VMware vMotion and DRS to function, and could be much more than that.

EMC could build a high-availability, high-performance all-flash storage array that may even use InfiniBand as an interconnect. The new Nimbus Data E-Class storage array matches this description perfectly, and their CEO tells me that performance over InfiniBand is indeed comparable to in-server PCIe flash cards. It seems logical for EMC to enter this market, if only to disrupt the momentum of Fusion-io and the rest of the all-flash storage upstarts.

Read more about the Nimbus E-Class: The First Big, Redundant, All-Flash Enterprise Array

The only fly in the ointment here is the recent consolidation of the InfiniBand market. Mellanox bought Voltaire, and QLogic sold out to Intel, putting that protocol on tenuous grounds. Perhaps 40 or 100 Gb Ethernet will emerge as a viable alternative for high-performance connectivity, or perhaps these products will retrench on shared PCI Express instead. Micron recently purchased Virtensys for just such a product, and Xsigo has been making big waves in the area of converged I/O as well. The market clearly need something better than Fibre Channel for maximum performance storage, even if InfiniBand isn’t it.

Stephen’s Stance

EMC VFCache (née Project Lightning) is a fairly simple offering: A server-based PCIe flash card that acts as a read cache with no integration with storage arrays or hypervisors. But EMC’s entrance into the host-based flash storage market is a powerful demonstration of the wave of disruption caused by flash-based storage and high-performance computing. Although I am not all that impressed with the product itself, I would be distressed if EMC had not introduced it.

VFCache illustrations are copyright EMC Corporation and are used here with permission

More solid, independent VFCache coverage:

• EMC Enters The Market With “Me Too” Flash Products (Chris Evans)
• Cache Splash and Complex is the new Simple (Martin Glassborow)

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2012. | EMC VFCache (aka “Project Lightning”) Is One Small Step, But an Important One
This post was categorized as 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.

Converged Networking Adapters like this QLogic 8242 are all the rage, but which are supported in VMware ESX and which have the broadest coverage of DCB features?

VMware has one awesome hardware compatibility list. It’s not the breadth of it (in fact, ESX’s range of hardware support is astonishingly small) but the thorough, public way in which VMware shares this information. It’s really worth a look, and I regularly visit the list to see what’s changed.

But the thoroughness and detail of the VMware HCL can be daunting. It’s fairly easy to search for a specific piece of hardware, but it’s difficult to tell what’s supported in a general sense. This causes trouble for people who are shopping for hardware, since it’s hard to know what’s supported without an exhaustive search.

As part of the preparation for my Storage for Virtual Servers seminar series this year, I decided to do some research. I’ve boiled down certain key hardware categories into a general plain-english list of what’s in and out of the ESX HCL. In the spirit of openness, I’m presenting this data here for all to see, and I welcome corrections and updates. Indeed, I’ll try to keep this page up to date as new hardware is added!

Minimum Requirements

No one should run unsupported hardware in a production environment. So the very minimum requirement for every buyer should be a list in the VMware ESX HCL with the proper firmware, driver, and software.

FCoE also requires a flow control mechanism, preferably 802.1Qbb, and the DCBX protocol to enable communication between ports. I strongly suggest running 802.1Qaz bandwidth management as well, since it will allow you to get more performance from your CNAs than plain PFC.

Congestion management (802.1Qau) isn’t required, and I’m not sure about the state of affairs for interoperability. So that’s a “nice to have” at this point, though it will certainly become more desirable in the future.

You might also look for a CNA that supports other protocols over DCB, since iSCSI is an attractive alternative to FCoE in the data center, as is NFS. But that’s just my opinion!

FCoE CNAs for VMware ESX

Let’s kick things off with FCoE CNAs. I’m not a huge fan of FCoE in general, but I do see it as an increasingly-viable protocol for large-scale enterprise virtualization products.

It’s critical to have supported hardware, and I suggest researching specific models on the HCL before buying. But here’s the general state of affairs with regard to FCoE CNAs:

I was surprised to see that Brocade and QLogic list 802.1Qau Congestion Management (QCN) as supported. I didn’t realize anyone supported this spec yet, or indeed that there was such a spec!

It’s also puzzling to see that QLogic does not list 802.1Qaz Bandwidth Management (ETS) as supported for the (admittedly older) QLE8042 card. Perhaps that’s a error? But then again, Emulex doesn’t list 802.1Qbb Priority Flow Control (PFC) for the LP21000, and although FCoE doesn’t require Qbb, it’s a very good idea…

Update: Emulex tells me the LP21000 does indeed support PFC (Qbb).

Stephen’s Stance

If you’re shopping for networking gear and want to move to FCoE eventually, I hope this list will help you get started. Most OEMs supply the latest Emulex, QLogic, and Brocade CNAs with their own part number, and the long ESX HCL is testament to this fact. But, generally speaking, if you’re using a latest-generation CNA like the QLogic 8200 or Emulex OneConnect series, you ought to be fine. The Brocade CNAs look good, too, but are a little harder to find.

Emulex tells me they will add QCN support once it’s ratified, and I look forward to learning more about the Brocade and QLogic implementations. I’d also love some feedback on how well these features work, and if they’re all they’re cracked up to be. Is one vendor’s PFC or ETS as good as another’s? And does DCBX really work in practice? I believe most folks aren’t mixing HBAs widely and are instead sticking to one manufacturer. That’s probably a good idea out here on the cutting edge!

I was surprised that no Intel or Broadcom cards are listed as supporting FCoE in the HCL. The Intel X520 is impressive, and I’d taken their “open FCoE” claims to include VMware. But I guess they’re not there yet, and this seems to be a glaring omission for a major player like Intel! Similarly, Broadcom is only talking about iSCSI with VMware. Where is their CNA with VMware support?

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2011. | VMware ESX FCoE CNA Compatibility in Plain English
This post was categorized as 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.

Do you want X-series or P-series storage? Is A-series networking gear any good? And where did all these HP products come from?

HP has always been an alphabet soup company, assigning just about every item in their bewildering array of products a unique product number. Like Mercedes-Benz cars, even the product names are a mix of letters and numbers that can be off-putting to browsers. Now that they have grown to supersize proportions through internal expansion and acquisition, just about everyone outside the company seems to have trouble decoding the product line, so I decided to take a stab at decoding the enterprise lineup in plain english.

An Important Note

This is not a political activity. I’m not trying to comment on which product is better than which or pigeonhole something by calling it “midrange” when HP thinks it’s “high-end”. I’m trying to be descriptive and helpful to prospective buyers working to understand the multitude of products sold by HP.

I welcome your input. In fact, I demand it! I don’t know which product is which and need your help to improve this list. Please feel free to comment and suggest corrections and additions (wireless?)

Storage Products (“StorageWorks”)

HP’s storage products are divided into three categories:

• P-series is block (SAN) storage using Fibre Channel or iSCSI
• X-series is file (NAS) storage
• Disk backup will presumably get a letter series in the future

Storage Product Notes

HP engineering input into OEMed products ranges from minimal to substantial. The EML tape library, for example, is very different from the standard Oracle (STK) product on which it is based. The high-end Hitachi-based storage includes substantial HP input as well.

HP StorageWorks VP of Marketing Tom Joyce informed me that the 3PAR T- and F-Class boxes won’t be renamed at this point. This is probably a good move – capitalize on the value of the 3PAR name rather than the virtually-unknown “P-series” nomenclature.

Others tell me that the StorageWorks 4400 is hitting end-of-life in the now-ish timeframe. So it won’t get a new name either.

Networking Products

HP’s networking products are divided into three categories:

• A-series is enterprise-class core switching, routing, and 200+ AP wireless
• E-series is mid-market and SMB switching and smaller wireless
• V-series is SMB and SoHo web-managed and unmanaged switching and wireless

Networking Product Notes

HP’s 3Com acquisition focused primarily on the H3C (former Huawei/3Com joint venture) high-end switching and routing products. Although some 3Com gear remains in the E-series line (particularly stackable switches), the low-end fixed-port switches have seemingly been eliminated from the product line. The Colubris acquisition provided HP with scalable wireless products now slotted below the H3C gear.

Stephen’s Stance

Product lines are always confusing at large companies, and doubly so where acquisitions bring in legacy products and customers. I wish HP the best of luck sorting all this out!

Note: The photo at the top is of a Japanese clone of the Enigma Machine from World War II.

Image credit: Japanese WWII Enigma Machine by Radio Rover

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2010. | Stephen’s HP Product Line Decoder Ring
This post was categorized as Computer History, Enterprise storage, Personal. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

For more information on earlier updates, see my articles:

• Storage Fixes in VMware ESX Server 3.5 Update 2
• Storage Changes in VMware ESX 3.5 Update 3

Expanded Support for Enhanced vmxnet Adapter

Not specifically a storage change, but the enhanced vmxnet adapter introduced back in the original release of ESX 3.5 now works with most versions of Windows Server 2003 and XP Pro. Look for improved performance when using guest-side SMB and NFS as well as the guest iSCSI initiator. Note that you cannot select this driver when configuring non-Enterprise Edition machines; you have to select Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (64-bit) regardless of which version of Server 2003 you are using.

Expanded SAS and SATA Controller Support

If you’d like to install ESX on a server equipped with a PMC 8011, Intel ICH9 or ICH10, CERC 6/I SATA/SAS Integrated RAID Controller, or HP Smart Array P700m Controller, you’ll find happiness in Update 4.

The Intel controllers are especially important, as we’re seeing them used more and more and this driver is more full-featured than the earlier Broadcom HT 1000 and Intel ICH7 drivers. The Intel ICH9/ICH10 is a dual-mode (IDE/ATA and AHCI/SATA) driver, supports SATA hard drives, SSDs, and optical drives, and now enables VMFS support when in AHCI/SATA mode. It’s not clear whether VMware actually supports VMFS datastores on ICH9/10 SATA, but it says it works. Anyone want to try it out? One thing is certain: You can’t use SATA drives in a shared/clustered environment because SATA does not include reservations. See this tech note and especially this question:

Earlier, it was mentioned that we can create VMFS if we use AHCI/SATA mode. If so, why did VMware not claim VMFS support when using SATA controller running in AHCI/SATA mode?

VMware might decide to add support in the near future. There is no strong need to have VMFS support on a SATA drive, because native SATA protocol does not support reserve/release. Reserve/release is needed if VMFS is used as clustered file system in a shared disk environment.

PXE Boot Support

Rich at VM/ETC points out that Update 4 includes experimental PXE boot support for ESX and ESXi. As he notes, this has major implications for cloud computing platforms, since it means that ESX servers can boot guests without local storage at all. Very interesting! Let’s bet that Update 5 (expected in June or July) will include this as a supported option.

Updated QLogic, Emulex, and LSI Drivers

Like most ESX updates, this one included updated Fibre Channel drivers.

• The QLogic Fibre Channel Adapter driver and firmware (versions 7.08-vm66 and 4.04.06, respectively) include bug fixes and enhanced NPIV support.
• On the Emulex side, driver version 7.4.0.40 supports the company’s HBAnyware 4.0 management software.
• Users of SAS and SCSI LSI MegaRAIDs will find driver version 3.19vmw (megaraid_sas) and 2.6.48.18 vmw (mptscsi) which improves performance and enhances event handling capabilities.

Expanded Sun Storage Array Support

All you StorageTek loyalists out there will be happy to see support for Sun’s low-end StorageTek 2530 SAS array as well as the modular 6580 and 6780 Fibre Channel arrays. It looks like just about every model in Sun’s current storage lineup is now supported in ESX.

Expanded Network Card Support

Support for Gigabit cards is greatly expanded, including HP’s quad-port NC375i and dual-port NC362i and NC360m, Intel’s Gigabit CT and 82574L, and NetXtreme’s BCM5722, BCM5755, BCM5755M, and BCM5756. Intel’s widely-used 10-gig 82598EB cards are now supported as well.

Tweaks and Fixes

Looking through the release notes, a few storage-related tweaks and fixes stand out:

1. WMware can optionally automatically throttle back the queue depth when congestion is encountered. See Controlling LUN queue depth throttling in VMware ESX for 3PAR Storage Arrays for more information.
2. VMklinux module heap size can now be adjusted as LUN queue-depth values are increased. Since tuning LUN queue depths is one common trick of the storage trade to improve performance, especially in queue-stingy systems like ESX, this is welcome news. But call VMware support before you monkey with it!
3. An RDM-related issue where SCSI inquiry data over 36 bytes was truncated or corrupted (for example when using Microsoft VSS and NetApp SnapDrive) has been resolved.

Well, that’s all folks. I suggest you all read the release notes for yourself, and please leave a comment if you see an error in what I wrote here or have something to add!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Storage Changes in VMware ESX 3.5 Update 4
This post was categorized as 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.

For more information on Update 2, see my article, Storage Fixes in VMware ESX Server 3.5 Update 2.

Update 3 is not as important from a storage perspective, but there are some goodies in there:

• New VMDK recovery tool (nifty!)
• Storage tweaks like fixed multipathing on IBM SVC, interrupt coalescing on QLogic 4 Gb FC HBAs, and some bug fixes
• Expanded support for SATA (but not for VMFS), SAS, and some Broadcom NICs (but still no TOE)

Read on for more details!

VMDK Recovery Tool

ESX users with Update 3 get a nifty new script for deeper inspection of disk image files on VMFS. Although I haven’t had a chance to try it out yet, it appears to be related to VCB, in that it identifies which disk blocks make up a VMDK. But the VMDK Recovery script (which runs in Service Console on ESX – sorry, ESXi!) allows you to copy these blocks to a new file.

What good is this? Well, it could certainly be used to recover VMDK files from corrupted VMFS datastores, and could serve as an undelete feature as well. And as Rich Brambley points out on VM/ETC, it could be the basis for some nifty scripted backup and restore operations as well. I’m looking forward to seeing what happens with this, but it’s definitely a minor addition.

Storage Tweaks

Update 3 includes some minor tweaks and bug fixes in storage:

• ESX used to only support most-recently used (MRU) multipathing with IBM’s SAN Volume Controller storage virtualization platform, but Update 3 allows fixed policies to be used as well.
• The VMkernel iSCSI driver gets two new advanced configuration options (Disk.UseLunReset and Disk.UseDeviceReset) to control whether multipath failover will issue a LUN reset or target reset.
• SCSI sense codes are now included in /var/log/vmkernel by default.  This should assist in deep troubleshooting of storage problems.
• The lengthy iSCSI target discovery process that used to happen whenever a discovery address was added has been removed, speeding up iSCSI storage configuration.
• Users of QLogic 4 Gb Fibre Channel HBAs will now get updated firmware and a new performance feature called interrupt coalescing. As it sounds, IC will combine interrupts from multiple I/Os, improving overall performance by reducing the number of interrupts the CPU has to handle.

Note that VMware ESX 3.5 Update 3 still doesn’t really make maximal use of 10 Gb Ethernet. Besides the lack of TCP offload engine (TOE) support, the company still doesn’t make any speed claims when people step up to faster NICs. The Known Issues list specifically says it’s for connectivity, not performance. At least the QLogic iSCSI HBA support is pretty good.

[ad#banner]

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Storage Changes in VMware ESX 3.5 Update 3
This post was categorized as 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.

The pistol shot heard this week was the starting gun for FCoE, not the execution of iSCSI

To hear this week’s storage industry news reports, one might think that Wagner’s fat lady came to Storage Networking World (SNW), singing her song as the iSCSI world collapses. Storagebod wonders what iSCSI’s death will look like. Chris Mellor at The Register says “Game Over” as NetApp, QLogic, Emulex and VMware join EMC and Cisco in singing the praises of Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE). Mellor suggests that the protocol will devalue Dell’s EqualLogic investment, as if HP’s acquisition of LeftHand wasn’t enough, even as fellow Register-ite, Bryan Betts disagrees.

But The Register didn’t invent the “FCoE kills iSCSI” meme – it’s just natural to imagine that these two protocols would be in a fight to the death. And if it’s a duel, then this year’s SNW conference would seem to be the first volley, as EMC introduced a FCoE Connectrix switch (based on Cisco), NetApp announced the first native FCoE array, and everyone qualified Emulex and QLogic adapters. However, despite these announcements, it’s way too early to bury iSCSI!

FCoE and iSCSI are similar in concept:

• Both rely on Ethernet physical connectivity
• Both transmit SCSI packets
• Both are aimed at date center users

But there are major differences as well:

• iSCSI is routable in an IP network
• iSCSI can use IP services like IPsec
• Software initiators can give iSCSI connectivity to any server, regardless of hardware
• FCoE will require converged network adapters (CNAs), while iSCSI can run on any Ethernet adapter
• FCoE will start at 10 Gb, while iSCSI can operate at just about any speed

Looking at this list, one might realize that FCoE is really a competitor for faster-than-4 Gb Fibre Channel. It’s not just a data center product, it’s an enterprise (read high-end and expensive) product, and that’s exactly where it will flourish. I have no doubt that Cisco and Brocade will successfully transition their Fibre Channel product lines to FCoE, and that QLogic and Emulex will sell a gazillion CNAs. But what about the rest of the market?

VMware’s adoption has shown that there is a taste for shared, networked storage outside the rarified budgets of the enterprise world. So far, no storage protocol has won the midrange and virtual server market, with Fibre Channel, iSCSI, and NFS duking it out along side internal SAS and SATA and the odd InfiniBand and external SAS solution. Although CNAs and FCoE ought to work fine in the virtual data center, not everyone will have a taste for them. There will always be plenty of folks who just want inexpensive external networked storage arrays, and iSCSI is the best thing they’re likely to see any time soon!

And iSCSI isn’t done evolving. Folks like Mellor, Chuck Hollis, and Storagebod are lauding FCoE at 10 gigabit speeds, but seem to forget that iSCSI can run at that speed, too. It can also run on the same CNAs and enterprise switches. And although wide(r)-area SANs aren’t common, I’m beginning to see some interest in leveraging the routability and other advanced features of IP in the storage world. iSCSI still has some cards to play! And the non-enterprise space isn’t nearly as awful as some make it sound – it is and will remain a bigger, more diverse market than the high end, and there are some serious buyers that will never get into FCoE.

Right now, the SAN world is expanding like it hasn’t done for years. iSCSI deployments are accelerating, growing the whole market. Sure, FCoE will probably completely replace old-school Fibre Channel over the next five years. But it will have to share the market with the now well-established iSCSI. It looks to me like Dell and HP made smart investments.

Update: More coverage on the topic:

• Doug Rainbolt from Alacritech is skeptical of the drivers for FCoE
• David Dale from NetApp feels that FCoE is unlikely to intrude on the iSCSI “sweet spot”

See my posts on Gestalt IT for similar enterprise IT infrastructure commentary

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Is the FCoE Starting Pistol Aimed at iSCSI?
This post was categorized as 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.

This was pretty puzzling, but Rich from VM /ETC and Duncan from Yellow Bricks were right – they just hadn’t updated the guide yet (even though the revision date was July 25).

So without further ado, the announcement:  You can now use Emulex and QLogic 8 Gb Fibre Channel HBAs with VMware ESX to give blazing I/O performance right where it’s needed.  Of course, 8 Gb storage arrays remain rare, but this will change soon.

An end-to-end 8 Gb FC SAN will likely provide all the performance of 10 Gb FCoE, and it’s available now instead of 2009 or 2010.  10 Gb iSCSI and NFS are also supported as of Update 2 if you’re more of a TCP/IP person…

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | QLogic and Emulex Deliver 8 Gb Fibre Channel For VMware ESX
This post was categorized as 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.

1. Support for Volume Shadow Copy Service (VSS) for filesystems Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2008 guests.  This means VMware services like VCB and SRM can now signal Windows Server to quiesce filesystems before creating a clone or snapshot and is a major addition!
2. Windows Server 2003 guests also get application quiescing, where supported.
3. You can now extend a live, running VMFS volume as storage is added, just like Windows Vista and 2008 guests could already do with raw device mode (RDM).  Note that this only works for flat disks with no persistent snapshots open.

A few items are now officially supported, too:

1. Support for Storage VMotion between and among Fibre Channel and iSCSI datastores is here, and in Update 1.
2. iSCSI over 10 gigabit Ethernet (10 GbE) is now supported allegedly, though the I/O Compatibility Guide still says “Gigabit only”.  Of course, it already worked, but it’s nice to have official support just the same…  Bring on the datacenter Ethernet!  They’ll support this in Update 1 too.
3. And NFS over 10 GbE is supported, too!

1. They supposedly added support for 8 gigabit Fibre Channel (8 Gb FC) HBAs, but I don’t see it in the I/O Compatibility Guide. The Emulex LP12000/LP12002 are noted as 4 Gb only, the QLogic QLE2560/QLE2562 aren’t listed, the HP 81/82 series isn’t there either.  Update:  QLogic and Emulex HBAs are supported after all!
2. Support for more Serial-Attached SCSI (SAS), including Dell SAS 5/E, LSI 1078, Sun SG‐XPCIESAS‐R‐EXT‐Z, and HP SC08GE is listed in the Stotage Compatibility Guide.
3. CIM system health monitoring of some QLogic and Emulex HBAs is new too.

[ad#banner]

See also:

• Scott Lowe’s (as always) excellent overview
• VM /ETC’s colorful post
• Excellent coverage at Yellow Bricks

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Storage Fixes in VMware ESX Server 3.5 Update 2
This post was categorized as 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.

Overall, I was impressed with many of these products this last year, but certainly CommVault, HDS, ProStor, Xsigo, and Akorri (winners all) stood out with important products. I too was surprised to see the absence of some heavyweights: Symantec’s strength in archiving and backup didn’t net them an award, and both Emulex and QLogic were skipped for the 8 Gb FC market. EMC was overlooked, too, but I’m certain that will be remedied for 2008 after the flurry of excellent new products announced these last few months.

Backup Software

• Winners: CommVault’s Simpana 7.0 – an impressive product that brings a very wide range of data protection features in an integrated package. They’d be in my top three! Next was the intriguing RecoverGuard from Continuity Software, a product which intrigues me. Finally, Yosemite’s amazingly priced FileKeeper Professional took bronze – I definitely would have put this up there, too!
• Strong contenders: EVault’s solution would have been my pick since it effectively tackles a real need – mobile and SMB data protection! Also, Symantec’s strong NetBackup 6.5 upgrade deserved more attention.

Backup Hardware

• Winners: NEC’s HydraStor HS8 isn’t a platform I’m familiar with – I’ll have to take the judges at their word! But I can’t argue with silver and bronze winners, Copan and ProStor’s cool RDX – both are truly revolutionary products and deserve the spotlight.
• Strong contenders: I would definitely have added Gresham’s Clareti VTL to the list – it’s much more than “just a VTL” and I hope it gets some more attention!

Disk and Disk Subsystems

• Winners: Seagate’s Momentus 5400 FDE.2 deserves considerable attention, bringing built-in hardware encryption to the mobile data market – every mobile disk should have this technology! NetApp’s FAS2000 (silver) is nice enough, but I was much more impressed with the bronze-winning USP V from HDS this year.
• Strong contenders: I would have given the USP V the top prize for 2007, but I can’t argue with the little Seagate disk. The AMCC 3ware 9600 RAID adapter deserves some attention, too.

Storage Management Software

• Winners: Akorri’s BalancePoint (gold) impresses me much like bronze-winning Onaro’s Application Insight does. Both make the big leap from “storage” to “application data”, and both are worthy winners. I’ve never used the silver-winning Finisar NetWisdom product, but it looks like others are impressed with it.
• Strong contenders: This was a crowded field, and Symantec, WysDM, Quantum StorNext, and the rest probably came close. I agree with the Akorri placing, but would have picked one of these instead of the potentially mis-categorized Finisar product.

Networking Equipment

• Winners: Xsigo took the top honors with their InfiniBand-based VP780 platform. This is truly a next-generation product, and it is getting serious attention and traction, and deserved a spot on the list! Riverbed’s excellent Optimization System (silver) also deserved its ranking, but I’m not familiar enough with the Storwize product to know if it’s truly bronze-worthy.
• Strong contenders: I would have tipped either QLogic or Emulex‘s 8 Gb offerings for a spot. Despite my jokes, 8 Gb FC is an important element of the modern SAN and both companies have carved out a compelling product, but apparently neither shipped in volume until this month…

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Reacting to TechTarget’s Storage Products of the Year
This post was categorized as Enterprise storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

I guess the egg comes before the chicken after all…

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2007. | Emulex and QLogic Learn to Speak Klingon!
This post was categorized as Enterprise storage, Everything. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.