Tony Pearson is a Master Inventor and Senior IT Architect for the IBM Storage product line at the
IBM Executive Briefing Center in Tucson Arizona, and featured contributor
to IBM's developerWorks. In 2016, Tony celebrates his 30th year anniversary with IBM Storage. 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.
(Short URL for this blog: ibm.co/Pearson )
My books are available on Lulu.com! Order your copies today!
Safe Harbor Statement: The information on IBM products is intended to outline IBM's general product direction and it should not be relied on in making a purchasing decision. The information on the new products is for informational purposes only and may not be incorporated into any contract. The information on IBM products is not a commitment, promise, or legal obligation to deliver any material, code, or functionality. The development, release, and timing of any features or functionality described for IBM products remains at IBM's sole discretion.
Tony Pearson is a an active participant in local, regional, and industry-specific interests, and does not receive any special payments to mention them on this blog.
Tony Pearson receives part of the revenue proceeds from sales of books he has authored listed in the side panel.
Tony Pearson is not a medical doctor, and this blog does not reference any IBM product or service that is intended for use in the diagnosis, treatment, cure, prevention or monitoring of a disease or medical condition, unless otherwise specified on individual posts.
I'm glad to be back home in Tucson for a few weeks. All of these conferences kept mefrom reading up with what was going on in the blogosphere.
A few of us at IBM found it odd that EMC would announce their new Geographically Dispersed Disaster Restart (GDDR) the weekBEFORE their "EMC World" conference. Why not announce all of the stuff all at once instead at the conference?Were they worried that the admission that "Maui" software is still many months awaythat much of a negative stigma? The decision probably went something like this:
EMCer #1: GDDR is finally ready, should we announce now, or wait ONE week to make it part of the thingswe announce at EMC World?
EMCer #2: We are not announcing much at EMC World and what people really want us to talk about, Maui, wearen't delivering for a while. Why can't people understand we are company of hardware engineers, not software programmers! So, better not be associated with that quagmire at all.
EMCer #1: Yes, boss, I see your point. We'll announce this week then.
My fellow blogger and intellectual sparring partner, Barry Burke, on his Storage Anarchist blog, posted [are you wasting money on your mainframe dr solution?"] to bringup the GDDR announcement. The key difference is that IBM GDPS works withIBM, EMC and HDS equipment, being the fair-and-balanced folks that IBM clientshave come to expect, but it appears EMC GDDR works only with EMC equipment.Because GDDR does less, it also costs less. I can accept that. You get whatyou pay for. Of course, IBM does have a variety of protection levels, one probably will meet your budget and your business continuity needs.
To correct Barry's misperception, companies that buy IBM mainframe servers do have a choice.They can purchase their operating system from IBM, get their Linux or OpenSolarisfrom someone else like Red Hat or Novell, or build their own OS distribution fromreadily available open source. And unlike other servers that might require at leastone OS partition from the vendor, IBM mainframes can run 100 percent Linux.GDPS supports a mix of OS data. z/OS and Linux data can all be managed by GDPS.Companies that own mainframes know this. I can forgive the misperception from Barry,as EMC is focused on distributed servers instead, and many in their company may not have muchexposure to mainframe technology, or have ever spoken to mainframe customers.
But what almost had me fall out of my chair was this little nugget from his post:
"If you're an IBM mainframe customer, you are - by definition - IBM's profit stream."
Honestly, is there anyone out there that does not realize that IBM is a for-profitcorporation? In contrast, Barry would like his readers to believe that EMC is selling GDDR at cost, andthat EMC is a non-profit organization. While IBM has been delivering actual solutions thatour clients want, EMC continues to rumor that someday they might get around to offering something worthwhile.In the last six months, the shareholders have interpreted both strategies for what they really are,and the stock prices reflect that:
(Disclosure: I own IBM stock. I do not own EMC stock. Stock price comparisonsby Yahoo were based on publicly reported information. The colors blue and red to represent IBM and EMC, respectively, were selected by Yahoo graph-making facility. The color red does not necessarily imply EMC is losing money or having financial troubles.)
Of course, I for one would love to help Barry's dream of EMC non-profitability come true. If anyone has any suggestions how we can help EMC approach this goal, please post a comment below.
He feels I was unfair to accuse EMC of "proprietary interfaces" without spelling out what I was referring to. Here arejust two, along with the whines we hear from customers that relate to them.
EMC Powerpath multipathing driver
Typical whine: "I just paid a gazillion dollars to renew my annual EMC Powerpath license, so you will have to come back in 12 months with your SVC proposal. I just can't see explaining to my boss that an SVC eliminates the need for EMC Powerpath, throwing away all the good money we just spent on it, or to explain that EMC chooses not to support SVC as one of Powerpath's many supported devices."
EMC SRDF command line interface
Typical whine: "My storage admins have written tons of scripts that all invoke EMC SRDF command line interfacesto manage my disk mirroring environment, and I would hate for them to re-write this to use IBM's (also proprietary) command line interfaces instead."
Certainly BarryB is correct that IBM still has a few remaining "proprietary" items of its own. IBM has been in business over 80 years, but it was only the last 10-15 years that IBM made a strategic shift away from proprietary and over to open standards and interfaces. The transformation to "openness" is not yet complete, but we have made great progress. Take these examples:
The System z mainframe - IBM had opened the interfaces so that both Amdahl and Fujitsu made compatible machines.Unlike Apple which forbids cloning of this nature, IBM is now the single source for mainframes because the other twocompetitors could not keep up with IBM's progress and advancements in technology.
Update: Due to legal reasons, the statements referring to Hercules and other S/390 emulators havebeen removed.
The z/OS operating system - While it is possible to run Linux on the mainframe, most people associate the z/OSoperating system with the mainframe. This was opened up with UNIX System Services to satisfy requests from variousgovernments. It is now a full-fledged UNIX operating system, recognized by the [Open Group] that certifies it as such.
As BarryB alludes, the unique interfaces for disk attachment to System z known as Count-Key-Data (CKD) was published so that both EMC and HDS can offer disk systems to compete with IBM's high-end disk offerings. Linux on System zsupports standard Fibre Channel, allowing you to attach an IBM SVC and anyone's storage. Both z/OS and Linux on System z support NAS storage, so IBM N series, NetApp, even EMC Celerra could be used in that case.
The System i itself is still proprietary, but recently IBM announced that it will now support standard block size (512 bytes) instead of the awkward 528 byte blocks that only IBM and EMC support today. That means that any storage vendor will be ableto sell disk to the System i environment.
Advanced copy services, like FlashCopy and Metro Mirror, are as proprietary as the similar offerings from EMCand HDS, with the exception that IBM has licensed them to both EMC and HDS. Thanks to cross-licensing, you can do [FlashCopy on EMC] equipment. Getting all the storage vendors to agree to open standards for these copy services is still workin progress under [SNIA], but at least people who have coded z/OS JCL batchjobs that invoke FlashCopy utilities can work the same between IBM and EMC equipment.
So for those out there who thought that my comment about EMC's proprietary interfaces in any way implied thatIBM did not have any of its own, the proverbial ["pot calling the kettle black"] so to speak, I apologize.
BarryB shows off his [PhotoShop skills] with the graphic below. I take it as a compliment to be compared to anAll-American icon of business success.
TonyP and Monopoly's Mr. Pennybags Separated at Birth?
However, BarryB meant it as a reference back to long time ago when IBMwas a monopoly of the IT industry, which according to [IBM's History], ended in 1973. In other words, IBMstopped being a monopoly before EMC ever existed as a company, and long before I started working for IBM myself.
The anti-trust lawsuit that BarryB mentions happened in 1969, which forced IBM to separate some of the software from its hardware offerings, and prevented IBM from making various acquisitions for years to follow, forcing IBM instead into technology partnerships. I'm glad that's all behind us now!
Continuing my catch-up on past posts, Jon Toigo on his DrunkenData blog, posted a ["bleg"] for information aboutdeduplication. The responses come from the "who's who" of the storage industry, so I will provide IBM'sview. (Jon, as always, you have my permission to post this on your blog!)
Please provide the name of your company and the de-dupe product(s) you sell. Please summarize what you think are the key values and differentiators of your wares.
IBM offers two different forms of deduplication. The first is IBM System Storage N series disk system with Advanced Single Instance Storage (A-SIS), and the second is IBM Diligent ProtecTier software. Larry Freeman from NetApp already explains A-SIS in the [comments on Jon's post], so I will focus on the Diligent offering in this post. The key differentiators for Diligent are:
Data agnostic. Diligent does not require content-awareness, format-awareness nor identification of backup software used to send the data. No special client or agent software is required on servers sending data to an IBM Diligent deployment.
Inline processing. Diligent does not require temporarily storing data on back-end disk to post-process later.
Scalability. Up to 1PB of back-end disk managed with an in-memory dictionary.
Data Integrity. All data is diff-compared for full 100 percent integrity. No data is accidentally discarded based on assumptions about the rarity of hash collisions.
InfoPro has said that de-dupe is the number one technology that companies are seeking today — well ahead of even server or storage virtualization. Is there any appeal beyond squeezing more undifferentiated data into the storage junk drawer?
Diligent is focused on backup workloads, which has the best opportunity for deduplication benefits. The two main benefits are:
Keeping more backup data available online for fast recovery.
Mirroring the backup data to another remote location for added protection. With inline processing, only the deduplicated data is sent to the back-end disk, and this greatly reduces the amount of data sent over the wire to the remote location.
Every vendor seems to have its own secret sauce de-dupe algorithm and implementation. One, Diligent Technologies (just acquired by IBM), claims that their’s is best because it collapses two functions — de-dupe then ingest — into one inline function, achieving great throughput in the process. What should be the gating factors in selecting the right de-dupe technology?
As with any storage offering, the three gating factors are typically:
Will this meet my current business requirements?
Will this meet my future requirements for the next 3-5 years that I plan to use this solution?
What is the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for the next 3-5 years?
Assuming you already have backup software operational in your existing environment, it is possible to determine thenecessary ingest rate. How many "Terabytes per Hour" (TB/h) must be received, processed and stored from the backup software during the backup window. IBM intends to document its performance test results of specific software/hardwarecombinations to provide guidance to clients' purchase and planning decisions.
For post-process deployments, such as the IBM N series A-SIS feature, the "ingest rate" during the backup only has to receive and store the data, and the rest of the 24-hour period can be spent doing the post-processing to find duplicates. This might be fine now, but as your data grows, you might find your backup window growing, and that leaves less time for post-processing to catch up. IBM Diligent does the processing inline, so is unaffected by an expansion of the backup window.
IBM Diligent can scale up to 1PB of back-end data, and the ingest rate does not suffer as more data is managed.
As for TCO, post-process solutions must have additional back-end storage to temporarily hold the data until the duplicates can be found. With IBM Diligent's inline methodology, only deduplicated data is stored, so less disk space is required for the same workloads.
Despite the nuances, it seems that all block level de-dupe technology does the same thing: removes bit string patterns and substitutes a stub. Is this technically accurate or does your product do things differently?
IBM Diligent emulates a tape library, so the incoming data appears as files to be written sequentially to tape. A file is a string of bytes. Unlike block-level algorithms that divide files up into fixed chunks, IBM Diligent performs diff-compares of incoming data with existing data, and identifies ranges of bytes that duplicate what already is stored on the back-end disk. The file is then a sequence of "extents" representing either unique data or existing data. The file is represented as a sequence of pointers to these extents. An extent can vary from2KB to 16MB in size.
De-dupe is changing data. To return data to its original state (pre-de-dupe) seems to require access to the original algorithm plus stubs/pointers to bit patterns that have been removed to deflate data. If I am correct in this assumption, please explain how data recovery is accomplished if there is a disaster. Do I need to backup your wares and store them off site, or do I need another copy of your appliance or software at a recovery center?
For IBM Diligent, all of the data needed to reconstitute the data is stored on back-end disks. Assuming that all of your back-end disks are available after the disaster, either the original or mirrored copy, then you only need the IBM Diligent software to make sense of the bytes written to reconstitute the data. If the data was written by backup software, you would also need compatible backup software to recover the original data.
De-dupe changes data. Is there any possibility that this will get me into trouble with the regulators or legal eagles when I respond to a subpoena or discovery request? Does de-dupe conflict with the non-repudiation requirements of certain laws?
I am not a lawyer, and certainly there are aspects of[non-repudiation] that may or may not apply to specific cases.
What I can say is that storage is expected to return back a "bit-perfect" copy of the data that was written. Thereare laws against changing the format. For example, an original document was in Microsoft Word format, but is converted and saved instead as an Adobe PDF file. In many conversions, it would be difficult to recreate the bit-perfect copy. Certainly, it would be difficult to recreate the bit-perfect MS Word format from a PDF file. Laws in France and Germany specifically require that the original bit-perfect format be kept.
Based on that, IBM Diligent is able to return a bit-perfect copy of what was written, same as if it were written to regular disk or tape storage, because all data is diff-compared byte-for-byte with existing data.
In contrast, other solutions based on hash codes have collisions that result in presenting a completely different set of data on retrieval. If the data you are trying to store happens to have the same hash code calculation as completely different data already stored on a solution, then it might just discard the new data as "duplicate". The chance for collisions might be rare, but could be enough to put doubt in the minds of a jury. For this reason, IBM N series A-SIS, that does perform hash code calculations, will do a full byte-for-byte comparison of data to ensure that data is indeed a duplicate of an existing block stored.
Some say that de-dupe obviates the need for encryption. What do you think?
I disagree. I've been to enough [Black Hat] conferences to know that it would be possible to read thedata off the back-end disk, using a variety of forensic tools, and piece together strings of personal information,such as names, social security numbers, or bank account codes.
Currently, IBM provides encryption on real tape (both TS1120 and LTO-4 generation drives), and is working withopen industry standards bodies and disk drive module suppliers to bring similar technology to disk-based storage systems.Until then, clients concerned about encryption should consider OS-based or application-based encryption from thebackup software. IBM Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM), for example, can encrypt the data before sending it to the IBMDiligent offering, but this might reduce the number of duplicates found if different encryption keys are used.
Some say that de-duped data is inappropriate for tape backup, that data should be re-inflated prior to write to tape. Yet, one vendor is planning to enable an “NDMP-like” tape backup around his de-dupe system at the request of his customers. Is this smart?
Re-constituting the data back to the original format on tape allows the original backup software to interpret the tape data directly to recover individual files. For example, IBM TSM software can write its primary backup copies to an IBM Diligent offering onsite, and have a "copy pool" on physical tape stored at a remote location. The physical tapes can be used for recovery without any IBM Diligent software in the event of a disaster. If the IBM Diligent back-end disk images are lost, corrupted, or destroyed, IBM TSM software can point to the "copy pool" and be fully operational. Individual files or servers could be restored from just a few of these tapes.
An NDMP-like tape backup of a deduplicated back-end disk would require that all the tapes are in-tact, available, and fully restored to new back-end disk before the deduplication software could do anything. If a single cartridge fromthis set was unreadable or misplaced, it might impact the access to many TBs of data, or render the entire systemunusable.
In the case of a 1PB of back-end disk for IBM Diligent, you would be having to recover over a thousand tapes back to disk before you could recover any individual data from your backup software. Even with dozens of tape drives in parallel, could take you several days for the complete process.This represents a longer "Recovery Time Objective" (RTO) than most people are willing to accept.
Some vendors are claiming de-dupe is “green” — do you see it as such?
Certainly, "deduplicated disk" is greener than "non-deduplicated" disk, but I have argued in past posts, supportedby Analyst reports, that it is not as green as storing the same data on "non-deduplicated" physical tape.
De-dupe and VTL seem to be joined at the hip in a lot of vendor discussions: Use de-dupe to store a lot of archival data on line in less space for fast retrieval in the event of the accidental loss of files or data sets on primary storage. Are there other applications for de-duplication besides compressing data in a nearline storage repository?
Deduplication can be applied to primary data, as in the case of the IBM System Storage N series A-SIS. As Larrysuggests, MS Exchange and SharePoint could be good use cases that represent the possible savings for squeezing outduplicates. On the mainframe, many master-in/master-out tape applications could also benefit from deduplication.
I do not believe that deduplication products will run efficiently with “update in place” applications, that is high levels of random writes for non-appending updates. OLTP and Database workloads would not benefit from deduplication.
Just suggested by a reader: What do you see as the advantages/disadvantages of software based deduplication vs. hardware (chip-based) deduplication? Will this be a differentiating feature in the future… especially now that Hifn is pushing their Compression/DeDupe card to OEMs?
In general, new technologies are introduced on software first, and then as implementations mature, get hardware-based to improve performance. The same was true for RAID, compression, encryption, etc. The Hifn card does "hash code" calculations that do not benefit the current IBM Diligent implementation. Currently, IBM Diligent performsLZH compression through software, but certainly IBM could provide hardware-based compression with an integrated hardware/software offering in the future. Since IBM Diligent's inline process is so efficient, the bottleneck in performance is often the speed of the back-end disk. IBM Diligent can get improved "ingest rate" using FC instead of SATA disk.
Sorry, Jon, that it took so long to get back to you on this, but since IBM had just acquired Diligent when you posted, it took me a while to investigate and research all the answers.
Well, it's Tuesday again, and we had several announcements this month, so here is a quick recap.We had some things announce May 13, and then some more announcements today, but since I was busywith conferences, will combine them into one post for the entire month of May 2008.
This time, I thought I would go "audio" with a recording from Charlie Andrews, IBM director ofproduct marketing for IBM System Storage:
I had a great weekend, participating in this year's ["World Laughter Day"] yesterday, and preparingfor tonight's festivities, found me pulling out the various packages from "Simply Dinners" from my freezer.
A Tucson-based company, [Simply Dinners] offers an alternative to restaurant eating.My sister went there, assembled a set of freezer-proof plastic bags containingall the right ingredients based on specific recipes, and gave them to me for my birthday, and they have been sitting in my freezer ever since... until last weekend.
My sister was careful to choose items that fit my [Paleolithic Diet] that my nutritionist has me on. However, I was skepticalthat any plastic bag full of frozen groceries would be any better than anything I could assemble on my own.I did, after all, attend "chef school" and do know how to cook well. Each package was intended to be a "dinner for two" but since I am single, was two meals each for me.
So, I decided to try them out, which would also give me more room in my freezer for incoming items, and theycame out very well. The outside of each plastic bag was a label that explained all the steps required to heatthe food. Partially-cooked vegetables were wrapped in foil, and went in for the last 10 minutes of cooking the meat.The process was straightforward, and the meals were delicious, but nothing I could not have done on my own witha recipe and a trip to the grocery store.
The question is whether someone with little or no skills could achieve similar, or acceptable results. I havefriends who are limited to assembling sandwiches from luncheon meats and cheese slices, as anything involvingheat other than simply boiling water is beyond their skills.
The key difference between "cooking for yourself" and "building your own storage" is that you aren't buildingstorage for just yourself. Unless you are a one-person SMB company, you are building storage that all of youremployees and managers count on to do their jobs, and by extension your customers and stockholders count on.
Of course I had to read responses from others before jumping in with my thoughts.Dave Raffo from Storage Soup writes [Sun going down in storage],feeling this is yet another indication that Sun has lost their mind, recounting previous events that supportthat theory.EMC blogger Mark Twomey in his StorageZilla posts [When Open Isn't] felt a littlebit guilty kicking a competitor when down. EMC blogger Chuck Hollis questions the reasons peoplemight be tempted to even try this in his post [Do-it-Yourself Storage]. Here'san excerpt:
I really, really struggle with this concept, I do. Here's why:
Anything I use and get comfortable with -- well, I'm "locked in" to a certain degree. If I use a lot of storage software X; well, I'm sorta locked in, aren't I? Or, if I put my servers-as-storage on a three-year lease, I'm kind of locked in, aren't I?"
(For EMC, vendor lock-in is great when customers are using and comfortable with EMC products, and awful when they use andare comfortable with storage from someone else. But nobody who is "comfortable" with what they have ever complain about"vendor lock-in" do they? It's the ones who are growing uncomfortable and feel trapped in changing. Howinvolved a company's use of EMC's proprietary interfaces are can greatly determine the obstacles in switching toa different vendor.Of course, if you count yourself as someone growing uncomfortable with your existing storage vendor, IBM can help you fix that problem, but that is a subject for another post.)
Worried about "vendor lock-in"? Try "admin lock-in" where you must keep a storage admin around because he or shewas the one that put your storage together. I've seen several companies held hostage by their system adminsfor home-grown scripts that serve as "duct tape for the enterprise".The other issue is whether you have storage admins who have the necessary hardware and software engineering skillsto put suitable storage together. There are some very smart storage admins I know who could, and others that wouldhave a difficult time with this.
No doubt this is promising for the home office. I myself have taken several PCs that were running older versions of Windows,but not powerful enough to upgrade to Windows Vista, wiped them clean, loaded Linux, and configured them from everythingfrom simple browser workstations to full LAMP application server configurations. While this might sound easy, I am a professional hardwareand software engineer with Linux skills.I have no doubt that someone with sufficient engineering and Solaris skills could put together a storage system for home use.
One area where Sun definitely benefits from this "Open Storage" approach is to develop Solaris skills. I have no personal experience with OpenSolaris, but assume that if you learn it, you would be able to switch overto full Solaris quite easily.Today, most people have Windows, Linux and/or MacOS skills coming into the workforce, and this could be Sun's way of getting new fresh faces who understand Solaris commands to replace retiring "baby boomers". The lack of Solaris-knowledgeable admins is perhaps one reason why companies are switching to IBM AIX, Linux or Windows in theirdata center.
Certainly, IBM's strategic choice to support Linuxhas been a great success. People learn Linux on their home systems, and at school, and are able to carry those skillsto Linux running on everything from the smallest IBM blade server to IBM's biggest mainframe.
The videos on Sun for the "recipes" on how to put together various "storage configurations in ten minutes" appear simplerthan last summer's "How to hack an Apple iPhone to switch away from AT&T" procedures.
Continuing this week's theme on "best of breed", some questions arise: How is this calculated or determined?How is one storage solution "better" than another? Which attributes weigh more heavily in the decision?
Some attributes are directly measurable, like storage performance. For this, gather up a list ofall the storage products you are interested in, go to the [Storage Performance Council website],determine whether SPC-1 or SPC-2more closely matches your application workload, and then choose the best product fromthe benchmarks, discarding any vendors that don't bother to have benchmarks posted.The new SPC-2 benchmark was created, in part, to address new workloads for the Media and Entertainmentindustry. (For a comparison of the two, see my post [SPC benchmarks for Disk System Performance])
However, other attributes, like "easy to manage", are not as straightforward to measure.One client compared the complexity of different solutions by counting the number of cables involved to connect the various parts of each solution. Only external cables were considered. All of the cables inside an IBM SystemStorage DS8000 would not be counted. By this measure, a single IBM System z10 EC mainframe connected to a single IBM DS8000 disk system over a few FICON cables would therefore be "less complicated" than a thousand x86 servers connectedvia FCP SAN switches to dozens of disk systems.
But counting cables only handles the hardware part of the interconnections. You have to also considerthe interconnections between the software, between users, and between IT administrators. It is not alwaysobvious where those connections are, and how to count them into consideration.
This month, IBM introduced the first "Management Complexity Factor" (MCF) for the Media andEntertainment industry. IBM MCF a result of IBM's acquisition of NovusCG, and is an essential part of"Storage Optimization Services" being offered by IBM. Here is an excerpt from the[IBM Press Release]:
"Media companies are facing a double-edged sword with the exponential rise in digital media storage needs, coupled with concerns about optimizing storage to be more efficient," said Steve Canepa, vice president of Media and Entertainment, IBM. "By quickly and cost-effectively analyzing the interconnected IT and storage environments that increasingly comprise media operations, MCF for Media helps our clients identify opportunities for improvement and align their IT and business strategies."
Since 1995, IBM has invested more than $18 billion on public acquisitions, making it the most acquisitive company in the technology industry, based on volume of transactions.
IBM has a strong global focus on the media and entertainment industry across all of its services and products, serving all the major industry segments -- entertainment, publishing, information providers, media networks and advertising.
Today was a special day! IBM launched the world's first "Global Archive Solutions Center" in Guadalajara, Mexico.We had a formal "ribbon cutting", shown here were the following dignitaries (from left to right):
Eugenio Godard, IBM Guadalajara site level executive
Andy Monshaw, IBM General Manager of IBM System Storage
Cindy Grossman, IBM VP of Tape and Archive solutions
Luis Guillermo Martinez Mora, Secretary of economic development for the state of Jalisco, Mexico
José Décurnex, IBM General Manager for the country of Mexico
In the morning, we had a series of speeches from Cindy Grossman, Andy Monshaw, Eugenio Godard, and Federico Lepe (technology advisor for the governor for the state of Jalisco, Mexico).
While the hordes of press journalists, analysts and clients were taking the lab tour, we took a snap of thefront entrance. The day was packed with activity.
After the lab tour, IBMers Clod Barrera and Craig Butler presented to the analysts.
Cindy Grossman explained why IBM created a solutions center specific to archive solutions, and why wechose Guadalajara for its location.
I presented the pains and challenges companies are facing, and why they should partner with IBM forarchive solutions to address those requirements
Harley Puckett and I split the group. Harley is my colleague at the IBM Tucson ExecutiveBriefing Center who was the focal point for the various aspects of launching for the past eight months.He presented and moderated the presentations and demos to a collection of prospective clients.
That's me on the left, with Harley on the right.
I moderated a series of speakers to press and analysts. These included:
Mark LaBelle, Spectrum Health server and storage manager, and Steve Lawrence, Spectrum Health image solutions architect, presented their success story using IBM Grid Medical Archive Solution (GMAS). [Spectrum Health] manages seven hospitals and 130 service locations in Michigan, USA.
Mark Uren, ABSA technical architect, presented their success story working with IBM in deploying their Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) which includes Enterprise Content Management and archiving. Mark flew in all the way from Johannesburg, South Africa. [ABSA] is the financial services subsidiary of Barclay's serving theAfrican continent.
Jeffrey Beallor, president of [Global Data Vaulting], presented his success story as both a client and IBM Business Partner, offering backup and archiving solutions through "Software as a Service" (SaaS) business model. GlobalData Vaulting has its data centers in Canada, but provides services to clients worldwide.
We had a Q&A panel with the company representatives from Spectrum Health, ABSA, and Global Data Vaulting; followed by a Q&A panel with the collection of IBM executives to take questions from the press and analysts.Special thanks to Cyntia, Daniela, Carlos, Raul and Salvador for their help in making this a successful event!
(all three photos on this blog post taken by Mauricio, a professional photographer IBM hired for this event)
Continuing my summary of Pulse 2008, the premiere service managementconference focusing on IBM Tivoli solutions, I attended and presentedbreakout sessions on Monday afternoon.
Tivoli Storage "State-of-the-Subgroup" update
Kelly Beavers, IBM director of Tivoli Storage, presented the first breakout for all of the Tivoli Storage subgroup.Tivoli has several subgroups, but Tivoli Storage leads with revenuesand profits over all the others.Tivoli storage has top performing business partner channel of anysubgroup in IBM's Software Group division.IBM is world's #1 provider of storage vendor (hardware, softwareand services), so this came to no surprise to most of the audience.
Looking at just the Storage Software segment, it is estimatedthat customers will spend $3.5 billion US dollars more in the year 2011 than they did last year in 2007. IBM is #2 or #3 in eachof the four major categories: Data Protection, Replication, Infrastructure management, and Resource management. In eachcategory, IBM is growing market share, often taking away share fromthe established leaders.
There was a lot of excitement over the FilesX acquisition.I am still trying to learn more about this, but what I have gathered so far is that it can:
Like turning a "knob", you can adjust the level of backupprotection from traditional discrete scheduled backups, to morefrequent snapshots, to continuous data protection (CDP). Inthe past, you often used separate products or features to dothese three.
Perform "instantaneous restore" by performing a virtualmount of the backup copy. This gives the appearance that therestore is complete.
This year marks the 15th anniversary of IBM Tivoli StorageManager (TSM), with over 20,000 customers. Also, this yearmarks the 6th year for IBM SAN Volume Controller, having soldover 12,000 SVC engines to over 4,000 customers.
Data Protection Strategies
Greg Tevis, IBM software architect for Tivoli Technical Strategy,and I presented this overview of data protection. We coveredthree key areas:
Protecting against unethical tampering with Non-erasable, Non-rewriteable (NENR) storage solutions
Protecting against unauthorized access with encryption ondisk and tape
Protecting against unexpected loss or corruption with theseven "Business Continuity" tiers
There was so much interest in the first two topics that weonly had about 9 minutes left to cover the third! Fortunately,Business Continuity will be covered in more detail throughoutthe week.
Henk de Ruiter from ABN Amro bank presented his success storyimplementing Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) across hisvarious data centers using IBM systems, software and services.
Making your Disk Systems more Efficient and Flexible
I did not come up with the titles of these presentations. Theteam that did specifically chose to focus on the "business value"rather than the "products and services" being presented. Inthis session, Dave Merbach, IBM software architect, and I presentedhow SAN Volume Controller (SVC), TotalStorage Productivity Center,System Storage Productivity Center, Tivoli Provisioning Managerand Tivoli Storage Process Manager work to make your disk storagemore efficient and flexible.
I attended the main tent sessions on Day 2 (Monday). The focuswas on Visibility, Control and Automation.
Steve is IBM senior VP and Group Executive of the IBM Software Group, and presented someinsightful statistics from the IBM Global Technology Outlookstudy, some recent IBM wins, and other nuggets of IT trivia:
In 2001, there were about 60 million transistors per humanbeing. By 2010, this is estimated to increase to one billion per human
In 2005, there were about 1.3 billion RFID tags, by 2010this is estimated to grow to over 30 billion
IBM helped the City of Stockholm, Sweden, reduce traffic congestion 20-25% using computer technology
Only about 25% data is original, the remaining75% is replicated
In 2007, there were approximately 281 Exabytes (EB), expected to increase to 1800 EB by the year 2011
70 percent of unstructured data is user-created content, but 85 percent of this will be managed by enterprises
Only 20% of data is subject to compliance rules and standards, and about 30% subject to security applications
Human error is the primary reason for breaches, with34% of organizations experiencing a major breach in 2006
10% of IT budget is energy costs (power and cooling), and thiscould rise to 50% in the next decade
30 to 60 percent of energy is wasted. During the next 5 years, people will spend as much on energy as they will on new hardware purchases.
Al Zollar is the General Manager of IBM Tivoli. He discussedthe 20 some recent software acquisitions, including Encentuate and FilesX earlier this year.
"The time has come to fully industrialize operations" -- Al Zollar
What did Al mean about "industrizalize"? This is theclosed-loop approach of continuous improvement, including design, delivery and management.
Al used several examples from other industries:
Henry Ford used standardized parts and processautomation. Assembly of an automatobile went from 12 hours by master craftsmen, to delivering a new model T every 23 seconds off anassembly line.
Power generation was developed by Thomas Edison. A satellite picture showed the extent of the [Blackout of 2003 in Northeast US and Canada]. The time for "smart grid" has arrived, making sensors andmeters more intelligent. This allows non-essential IP-enabled appliances in our home or office to be turned off to reduce energy consumption.
[McCarran International Airport] integrated the management of 13,000 assets with IBM Tivoli Maximo Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) software, and was able to increase revenues through more accurate charge-back. Unlike traditional EnterpriseResource Planning (ERP) applications, EAM offers the deep management of four areas: production equipment, facilities, transportation, and IT.
When compared to these other industries, management of IT is in itsinfancy. The expansion of [Web 2.0] and Service-Oriented Architecture [SOA] is driving this need.What people need is a "new enterprise data center" that IBM Tivoli software can help you manage across operational boundaries. IBM can integrate through open standards with management software from Cisco, Sun, OracleMicrosoft, CA, HP, BMC Software, Alcatel Lucent, and SAP.Together with our ecosystems of technology partners, IBM ismeeting these challenges.
IBM clients have achieved return on investment from gettingbetter control of their environment. This week there are client experience presentations Sandia National Labs, Spirit AeroSystems, Bank of America, and BT Converged communication services.
Chris O'Connor used some of his staff as "actors" to show an incredible live demo of various Tivoli and Maximo products for the mythical launch of "Project Vitalize", thenew online web store for a new "Aero Z bike" from the mythical VCA Bike and Motorcycle company.
Shoel Perelman played the role of "CIO".The CIO locked down all spending, and asked the IT staff to make the shift from bricks-and-mortar to web salesof this new product on in 15 months. While the company andsituation were mythical, all the products that were part of thelive demo are all readily available.The CIO had three goals:
What do we have? where is it? what's connected to what?Traditionally, these would be answered from lists in spreadsheets.The CIO had a goal to deploy IBM Tivoli Application DependenceDiscover Manager (TADDM) which discovered all hardware and software,with an easy to understand view, and how each piece serves the business applications.
Each of the teams have processes, and needed them consistent andrepeatable, tightly linked together. Time is often wasted on thephone coordinating IT changes. For this, the CIO had a goalto deploy Tivoli Change and Configuration Management Database (CCMDB) for "strict change control".The process dashboard is accessible for all teams, to see how all projects are progressing. There is also aCompliance dashboard, which identifies all changes by role, clearly spelling out who can do what.
There is a lot of computerized machinery, Manufacturing assets and robotics. The CIO set a goal to "do more with existing people", and needed to automate key processes.Sales rep wanted to add a new distributor to key web portal.This was all done through their "service catalog", When they needed to deploy a new application, they were able to find servers with available capacity and adjust using automatic provisioning. Thanks to IBM, the IT staff no longer get paged at 3am in the morning, and fewer days are spent in the "war room". They now have confidence that thelaunch will be successful.
Ritika Gunnar played the role of "Operations manager". She highlightedfive areas:
"Service viewer" dashboard with green/yellow/red indicators forall of their edge, application and datbase servers. This allowsher to get data 4-5 times faster and more accurate.
Tivoli Enterprise Portal eliminates bouncingaround various products.
Tivoli Common Reporting for CPU utilization of all systems, helps find excess capacity usingIBM Tivoli Monitor
On average, 85 percent of problems are caused by IT changes to the environment. IBM can help find dependencies, so that changes in one area do not impact other areas unexpectedly
Process Automation will Show changes that have been completed, in progress, or overdue.She can see all steps in a task or change request. A"workflow" automates all the key steps that need to be taken.
Laura Knapp played the role of "Facilities manager". She wanted to See all processes that apply to her work using a role-based process dashboard. The advantage of using IBM is that it changes work habits, reduces overtimeby 42 percent, improves morale. The IT staff now works as team,collaborates more, and jobs get done faster with fewer mistakes.Employees are online, accessing, monitoring and managing dataquicker. In days not weeks.
IBM Tivoli Enterprise Console (TEP) served as a common vehicle.She was able to pull up floor plan online, displaying all of the managed assets and mapped features. With the temperature overlay from Maximo Spatial, she was able to review hot spots on data center floor. Heat can cause servers to fail or shut down.
Power utilization chart at peak loadsCan now anticipate, predict and watch power consumption,and were able to justify replacement with newer, more energy-efficient equipment.
The CIO got back on stage, and explained the great success of thelaunch. They use Webstore usage tracking, security tools tracking all new registrations, and trackingserver and storage load.It now only takes hours, not weeks, to add new business partners and distributors.Tivoli Service Quality Assurance toolstrack all orders placed, processed, and shipped.Faster responsiveness is competitive advantage. TheirIT department is no longer seen as stodgy group, but as a world classorganization.
The live demo showed how IBM can help clients with rapid decisionmaking, speed and accuracy of change processes, and automation to take actions quickly. The result is a strong return on investment (ROI).
Liz Smith, IBM General Manager of Infrastructure Services, presented the results of an IBM survey to CEOs and CIOs asking questions like: What is the next big impact? Where are you investing?What will new datacenter look like?
The five key traits they found for companies of the future:
They were hungry for change
Innovative beyond customer imagination
Disruptive by nature
Genuine, not just generous
The IT infrastructure must be secure, reliable, and flexible.Taking care of environment is a corporate responsibility, notjust a way to reduce costs.
The five entry points for IBM Service Management: Integrate, Industrialize,Discover,Monitor and Protect.IBM Service management and compliance are critical for theGlobally Integrated Enterprise, with repeatable, scalable and consistent processes that enablechange to an automated workflow. This reduces errors, risks and costs, and improves productivity.IBM has talent, assets and experience to help any client get there.
Lance lives in Austin, TX, where IBM Tivoli is headquartered,so this made a good choice as a keynote speaker.He is best known for winning seven "Tour de France" bicycle races in a row, but he spoke instead gave an inspirational talk about how he survived cancer.
In 1996, Lance was diagnosed with cancer. Surprisingly, He said it was thegreatest thing that happened to him, and gave him new perspective on his life, family and the sport ofbicycling.Back then, there wasn't a webMD, Google or other Web 2.0 socialnetworking sites for Lance to better understand what he wasgoing through, learn more about treatment options, or find othersgoing through the same ordeal.
After his treatment, he was considered "damaged goods" by manyof the leading European bicycle teams. So, he joined the US Postal Serviceteam, not known for their wins, but often invited to sell TVrights to American audiences. Collaborating with his coachesand other members of his team, he revolutionized the bicycling sport, analyzed everything about the race, and built up morale.He won the first "yellow jersey" in 1999, and did so each yearfor a total of seven wins.
Lance formed the [Livestrong foundation] to help other cancer survivors. Nike came to him and proposed donating 5 million "rubber bracelets"colored yellow to match his seven yellow jerseys, with the name "Livestrong" embossed on them, that his foundation couldthen sell for one dollar apiece to raise funds. What some thought was a silly idea at first has started amovement.At the 2004 Olympics, many athletes from all nations and religious backgrounds, wore these yellow braceletsto show solidarity with this cause.To date, the foundation has sold over 72 million yellow bracelets, and these have served to provide a symbol,a brand, a color identity, to his cause.
He explained that doctor's have a standard speech to cancer survivors.As a patient, you can go out this doorway and never tell anyone,keep the situation private. Or you can go out this other doorway, you tell everybody your story. Lance chose the latter, and he felt it was the best decision he ever made.He wrote a book titled [It's Not About the Bike: My Journey Back to Life].
His call to action for the audience: find out what can you do to make a difference.A million non-governmental organizations[NGO] have started in the past 10 years. Don't just give cash, also give your time and passion.