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 (6)

1 localhost commented Trackback

Indeed, the next part of my virtualization story looks at ugradeabilty, from a software and hardware part of view. There 's been a few topics out there discussing this in the past as well.

2 localhost commented Trackback

Just to set the record straight:<div>&nbsp;</div> Invista does not require the use of PowerPath, nor does it require ANY host resident path management. And it indeed works with ANY host resident path management you may choose.<div>&nbsp;</div> Today, without some outside assistance, no virtualization solution can be "inserted" into an existing non-virtualized (or competitor-virtualized) environment non-disruptively. This because hosts are bound (logged in) to existing world-wide names and the LUN bindings must be broken and reastablished (often requiring reboot of the host - AIX is particularly troublesome, since it's implementation of MPIO is rather strict - but I digress)<div>&nbsp;</div> PowerPath Migration Enabler (PPME) is the first (and only?) host-resident filter driver that breaks this restriction by masking the move/change/relogin of LUNs from the non-virtualized arrays into the virtualization naming. And PPME thus allows Invista to be installed non-disruptively - so perhaps this is where you came to the incorrect conclusion above.<div>&nbsp;</div> Now, I know that you insist that you have no responsibility to ensure the accuracy of the assertions you make in your blog. And I'll stop debating that, even though the vast majority of my readers continue to disagree with you.<div>&nbsp;</div> But I still think you owe it to your readers, if not to IBM's Blogging Policy and BCGs, to get your facts straight, especially when you're discussing (or dissing) your competitor's products.

3 localhost commented Trackback

StorageZilla provides updates here:http://storagezilla.typepad.com/storagezilla/2007/09/the-future-is-v.html

4 localhost commented Trackback

BarryB, perhaps "requires" was the wrong term. I will edit the update to say "Continues" for EMC customers that add Invista to their existing EMC disk arrays.

5 localhost commented Trackback

BarryB, your comment "no virtualization solution can be "inserted" into an existing non-virtualized (or competitor-virtualized) environment non-disruptively" is not what Chris Evans was talking about. He was talking about upgrades once virtualization was already deployed, and in this case, SVC can provide non-disruptive upgrades from one SVC-virtualized environment to an upgraded SVC-virtualized environment.<div>&nbsp;</div> Many customers however, bring in SVC for new servers, or to provide new additional storage to existing servers, neither of these impact existing server-to-storage LUN connections. <div>&nbsp;</div> Others take advantage of our recent SofTek TDMF acquisition that offers non-disruptive migration from non-virtualized to virtualized using IBM Data Mobility Services.<div>&nbsp;</div> Customers with EMC Invista or HDS Tagmastore are welcome to call their local IBM rep to help them upgrade to IBM SVC instead. We can help them with this migration process.

Add a Comment Add a Comment