NetAppChat

I think it's the future of storage and very promising in theory. Needs more investment and mature SW

We've never thought of SAN as silo'ed storage in that way. In fact, we've been one of the only vendors in the industry to natively (truly) support any protocol across a standard data platform.

(cont) the introduction of technologies such as HCI and ServerSAN into the market was inevitable, as the x86 architectures speeds and feeds became cheaper and faster.

(cont) that doesn't mean we've changed our M.O. We're still NetApp. We still do what we do. And oh, we can make a unique HCI solution too while people argue the merits of what is and is not "HCI".

I see hyperconverged as requiring a new mindset for legacy applications -- not just about storage, networking!

@datacenterdude I linked my definition, a box/appliance for storage that is separate from compute does not qualify. It may be SDS but isn't HCI.

For some use cases, but you will upgrade your servers more often then your storage

@scoxnew but should we start upgrading servers and storage alike?

@scoxnew a goal of the new architecture is to turn infrastructure into a pool, so migrations are eliminated and simply becomes adds/removes as needed

Cost and performance and tech refresh time frames are the drivers it is hard to align these for servers and storage

My main problem with HCI is the linear scale part. You always have excess of either capacity or horsepower. I don't like excesses. I don't want my customers to have to shuffle stuff around to optimize just to get a 15 min 1-time installer.

@scoxnew it may be a little tough the first time, but elimination of the upgrade (pain) cycle is a big deal http://premium.wikib...

@datacenterdude that's what the software layer is for and a good solution has flexibility in the expansion options

@scoxnew Not difficult to align servers, storage refresh in niche orgs (film, HPC, biotech, etc.).

ISCSI vs FC vs FCoE and knowing when to choose a protocol when all are available to you can be a challenge.

@ajbergh most users that I talk to don't care about the protocol, for example a FlexPod user just cares that the solution works, not if it is FCoE or iSCSI

@stu I have found that to be true except in large enterprises with highly siloed teams; still the same barrier...

@stu Great point, but they have pluses and minues which sometimes need to be discussed and explained

thanks adam!

its also bc we build the interaction thread on public twitter too for great readability on twitter when chat is over

A4: Faster data access is key; #flash is certainly helping that.

The top three things I hear: a) Ease of setup/maintenance b) connecting to host environments (i.e. proper zoning/config) and c) Staff doesn't scale as well.

@datacenterdude Agree on the staff part. When personnel is one of the biggests costs, a scalable SAN is very important to business effectiveness.

.@ripw5280 I'm not SAN expert but I assume that it is important to pay attention to the fundamentals of SQL Server

(cont) These are not new problems. As much as we want to believe Flash will be the end-all, be-all for SAN, the reality is many of the core problems still exist. SAN is still SAN.

Complexity of data migrations

@arianagradow it is certainly fundamental to understand your workloads. Too many people just say "put it on flash and don't worry about it."

@datacenterdude I agree. Flash deals with mechanical latency and it can help with copy creep but you still need a management stack

meeting backup windows and backup for remote sites

A4: Challenges are lack of granular data recovery; no easy way to manage compliance; data migration too costly.

A4: 1. Ease of use. 2. Updated infrastructure to use advanced features. 3. Training people to use and understand the new technologies.

A4 : Top 3? Biz-critical DB’s & apps running by virtually eliminating storage downtime, improving ops perf (make better-informed decisions), increase the efficiency of DB’s+ apps & reducing IT mgmt workloads, & high perf with high productivity

R Cox, how much does bandwidth play into this?

@dvellante @datacenterdude Not mention personnel and operational latency—I think we could solve a lot of problems that way!

@dvellante Could you please expand on data migrations? Have you looked as thin provisioning and reclamation? #NetAppChat

bandwidth and dedup are important

answering in the thread under the question increases virality

are you referring to scale out NAS?

Well, certainly connectivity mediums and throughputs have increased to a level where we almost cannot saturate links anymore. I believe the capabilities native to a SAN are just as important to any 3rd party technologies/optimizations

...and that should truly be a decision pivot point when choosing a storage vendor.

A: Optimizations can be as simple as making sure you are properly using ALUA, making sure path redundancy is implemented correctly, etc...

A3: Now a days we're seeing cusotomers move toward adopting Flash and even RAM as storage tiers to supplement SAN #NetAppChat

A3: One of the easiest to use is the Virtual Storage Console: automatically sets 32 parameters in ESXi for best performance optimization with @NetApp!

A3. LOTS! Snapshots, dedupe-aware replication, AWS, Azure integration.

. @ajbergh flash memory is very important and software that integrates platforms

@furrier But especially software. (smile)

"latest-greatest" Flash, 16Gb FC, advancements in RAS, and SAN-based storage resource management.