Inside System Storage -- by Tony Pearson

Tony Pearson Tony Pearson is a Master Inventor and Senior IT Specialist for the IBM System Storage product line at the IBM Executive Briefing Center in Tucson Arizona, and featured contributor to IBM's developerWorks. In 2011, Tony celebrated his 25th year anniversary with IBM Storage on the same day as the IBM's Centennial. He is author of the Inside System Storage series of books. This blog is for the open exchange of ideas relating to storage and storage networking hardware, software and services. You can also follow him on Twitter @az990tony.
(Short URL for this blog: ibm.co/Pearson )
  • Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (5)

1 localhost commented Trackback

Well, for one thing, you don't let facts get in the way of your "theories", Tony. <div>&nbsp;</div> For example:<div>&nbsp;</div> The high-end array category (usually defined by more than two storage controllers, hence including DMX and HDS, excluding the dual controller DS8000) appears to have been growing in the low single digits. <div>&nbsp;</div> Not as fast in past years, but still growing. There's no evidence of a "meltdown". If you have any (other than innuendo) please do share it.<div>&nbsp;</div> As far as IBM taking share, technically you're right. The last Gartner info I saw showed IBM growing around %0.2 share across broad market categories. <div>&nbsp;</div> Yes, that's "single-digit growth", but it's probably nothing to crow about. Congratulations, by the way, that's marked improvement from the past.<div>&nbsp;</div> Robin's comments referred to large-capacity clustered (or scale-out) arrays, and not traditional high-end large-cache designs, or mid-tier arrays, I believe. <div>&nbsp;</div> Think "StorageTank" as a rough equivalent. No, maybe on second thought, that's a bad analogy on several levels ... <div>&nbsp;</div> As far as "holding off buying any EMC product until Q2'08", well, that's a pretty uneducated statement, in my opinion. Your repeating it doesn't make it any more intelligent.<div>&nbsp;</div> Just so you know, the latest EMC acquisition (Berkeley Data Systems aka Mozy) does not offer storage as a service, just backup. <div>&nbsp;</div> EMC has not "lost the Dell partnership". Go read up on this, including their most recent earnings announcement. Let me know if I can send you a few links.<div>&nbsp;</div> The lawsuit is just that -- a lawsuit. IBM gets plenty of them as well, as do most large companies. I can send you a list of IBM's recent and current lawsuits, if you'd like.<div>&nbsp;</div> Insinuating that the HDS product is unstable without facts is simply spreading FUD, and I know that IBM doesn't do that ;-)<div>&nbsp;</div> This is not a good post, Tony. <div>&nbsp;</div> You need to do better.

2 localhost commented Trackback

Chuck,All valid points. I will edit and re-post.<div>&nbsp;</div> My intent was to disagree with Robin's assertion that "IBM must be feeling the chill" and as I point out, we are not.<div>&nbsp;</div> I re-read his comment about 2Q08, and agree I had misinterpreted his intent, so have corrected that.<div>&nbsp;</div> If you have links that contradict Robin's assertion that "NetApp and EMC are both reporting problems in the high-end." then please provide.<div>&nbsp;</div> The analyst reports I look at treat "high-end" by price band and host attachment, not internal technological architecture. Many consider DMX, USP-V and DS8000 in the category of high-end based on their price points. We can agree to disagree, but I will clarify what I am calling "high end", as that is key to my point of why a face-to-face sales force is needed for high-end deals.<div>&nbsp;</div> Storage Tank technology has been incorporated into IBM's General Parallel File System (GPFS) and is doing well in a variety of use cases, in a variety of large deployments. GPFS under the covers in a variety of our storage products, including the Grid Medical Archive Solution.<div>&nbsp;</div> My reference to "potential loss" referred to 2011 when Dell decides whether to renew or not renew its agreement, but I agree that was too subtle. I will rephrase.<div>&nbsp;</div> I was not insinuating HDS had unstable products, but rather that customers are leery of adopting new technologies, no matter how good they are. I will clarify.<div>&nbsp;</div> --- Tony

3 localhost commented Trackback

Thanks for the modifications, Tony -- a bit more balanced and in keeping with your previous tone.<div>&nbsp;</div> Of course, we could debate endlessly a few of the points, but that wasn't my goal!

4 localhost commented Permalink

The Grid Medical Archive Solution is based on technology that IBM has OEM'd from Bycast. If GPFS plays any role at all in GMAS, it's a very minor one.

5 localhost commented Trackback

Walter,The Bycast software that IBM OEM's for the GMAS handles the front-end, grid access to the storage repository. GPFS is the file system for the back-end which is designed to allow multiple servers to store the data, with policies to determine FC or SATA disk placement and movement, and allows Tivoli Storage Manager to migrate files from disk to tape, and recall them back automatically on reference. For example, if you access an X-ray image that was taken and stored two years ago, it might be on tape, and it would be moved back to disk.<div>&nbsp;</div> -- Tony

Add a Comment Add a Comment