January 10, 2011 – Any top technologies list is somewhat (totally?) arbitrary. Do you pick them based on how interesting the technologies are? How much end-user interest is behind them? The extent to which the technologies will benefit end users? How much revenue they’ll generate? Or all of the above? Let’s go with “all of the above.”
Here’s my list of some of the key storage technologies for this year (in no particular order), with links to related in-depth features and recent product news articles from InfoStor and our partner site Enterprise Storage Forum.
#1. Solid-state disk (SSD) drives
2011 will finally be The Year of SSDs. All of the major disk array vendors now offer SSDs (mostly from STEC, although competition will heat up significantly this year). Prices are declining rapidly as volumes increase and technology improves. Some vendors are positioning relatively inexpensive multi-level cell (MLC), as opposed to single-level cell (SLC), NAND flash for enterprise duty. SSD and controller vendors have solved most of the issues around reliability and endurance which, together with the price declines, eliminate the primary gating factors to end-user adoption of SSDs.
Market researcher IDC predicts that the total SSD market will grow at a 58% CAGR in unit shipments and a 44% CAGR in revenues over the next few years.
The fastest growing segment of the overall market is enterprise-class SSDs, where unit shipment are expected to surge at a CAGR of 74%, and revenues are expected to grow at a 54% clip, through 2014.
IDC expects the total SSD market to exceed $7 billion in 2014.
Related articles:
Why solid state drives won’t replace spinning disk (Enterprise Storage Forum)
Fixing SSD performance degradation, part 1 (Enterprise Storage Forum)
Fixing SSD performance degradation, part 2 (Enterprise Storage Forum)
SSDs hit mainstream stride
Intel ships miniature SSDs
SSD update: Toshiba, OCZ
Hitachi GST enters SSD market
STEC scores OEM win with IBM for MLC SSDs
LSI ships SSD-based accelerator card
#2. Data reduction (data deduplication and/or compression) for primary storage
Just like data deduplication for secondary storage swept the market and became mainstream over the last couple years, data reduction for primary storage will gain traction in end-user adoption over the next two years.
Interest in data reduction for primary storage picked up significantly last year due in large part to a number of factors, including NetApp’s evangelizing the technology, IBM’s acquisition of Storwize, Dell’s acquisition of Ocarina, and the entry of startups such as BridgeSTOR.
Related articles:
IBM to buy Storwize for real-time data compression (Enterprise Storage Forum)
Dell to acquire Ocarina for data deduplication
Startup BridgeSTOR enters data reduction market
Musings on the future of data dedupe (blog post)
Data deduplication: Permabit finds success with OEM model (blog post)
#3. Cloud storage
A few years after the term ‘cloud storage’ was introduced, vendors and users are still debating what it is. Let’s just call it storage-as-a-service, whether internal (private) or external (public, or hosted). There were probably more product/service announcements regarding cloud storage last year than any other technology. And there’s little doubt that will continue in 2011.
Related articles:
SNIA forms Cloud Backup and Recovery SIG
SNIA develops standards for cloud storage
SNIA completes cloud storage standard
Guidelines for implementing cloud storage
EMC debuts self-service platform for cloud storage
F5 ARX appliances integrate with cloud storage
#4. Data center convergence
Data center convergence can be viewed as the unification of storage, servers and networks, or, as the convergence of networks. In the context of the latter, we’ll see increased end-user interest in Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE) in 2011, which was stalled over the last year due in part to the slump in IT spending. But as the IT world moves to 10GbE, the old FCoE-vs.-iSCSI debate will be renewed this year (with a lot of the debate centered on performance and cost issues).
I also expect a lot of controversy over the various approaches to converged (10GbE/FC/iSCSI) adapters, which are usually referred to as converged network adapters (CNAs). Expect a battle royale between vendors such as Emulex, QLogic, Intel, Broadcom and others.
Related articles:
Guidelines for FCoE deployment
FCoE I/O convergence and virtualization
Brocade moves FCoE beyond top-of-rack (Enterprise Storage Forum)
Broadcom claims 2 million+ IOPS on converged controller (blog post)
Intel’s card play in unified networking (10GbE+iSCSI+FCoE)
#5. Storage solutions for virtual servers and desktops
There has been a lot of innovation from storage vendors as well as virtual server platform vendors over the last few years in the area of optimizing storage for virtual server environments, particularly in disk arrays and backup/recovery software. But this year, Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) deployments will take off, and just as virtual servers created a lot of storage challenges, so will VDI.
According to a Client Virtualization Straw Poll conducted by CDW, which surveyed 200 IT managers, 91% of the respondents plan to implement some form of client virtualization within the next 12 to 24 months. The primary drivers behind adoption of client virtualization are improved operational efficiency and reduced costs (expected savings were estimated at 20% of the IT budget, according to early adopters).
Related articles:
Storage considerations for VDI implementations
Seven steps to a successful VDI implementation
FalconStor adds VDI support to SAN Accelerator
Related blog post: The Top Ten storage acquisitions of 2010
Showing posts with label data deduplication. Show all posts
Showing posts with label data deduplication. Show all posts
Monday, January 10, 2011
Friday, December 10, 2010
Musings on the future of data dedupe
December 10, 2010 – I recently chatted with a few vendors in the data deduplication space. As conversations often do at this time of year, the talk turned toward the future of data deduplication. Here are a few snippets.
“Tier 1 storage vendors will move past point solutions for deduplication next year,” says Tom Cook, CEO at Permabit. “They’re working toward end-to-end deduplication, across SAN, NAS, unified [block and file], nearline and backup.”
“When that happens, once their customers ingest data and get it into a deduplicated state they’ll never have to re-hydrate that data throughout its lifecycle. The data will stay deduplicated through processes such as replication and backup. That’s a huge savings in workflow, footprint and bandwidth,” say Cook.
“Today, the big vendors use a variety of point solutions, but they’d like to use a single data optimization product across all their platforms, whether it’s block or file, primary or secondary. End-to-end deduplication will creep into the market in 2011 and 2012,” Cook predicts. (Permabit sells deduplication software – dubbed Albireo – to OEMs.)
Personally, I don’t think that single-solution, end-to-end deduplication will happen that quickly, in part because of the huge investments that the Tier 1 vendors have made in their “point solutions,” but we’ll see.
Dennis Rolland, director of advanced technology at Sepaton, has some predictions that are similar to Cook’s, as well as some differing opinions regarding trends in the data deduplication market.
“Dedupe will be required in more places going forward, including primary storage in addition to nearline storage, and end users will have to cut down on how many dedupe solutions they have because of the complexity in managing many disparate solutions,” says Rolland, “but we’ll probably still have distinct solutions for primary and nearline storage deduplication.”
Rolland thinks that the emphasis on deduplication benefits such as capacity, footprint and cost savings is shifting. “Dedupe enables low-bandwidth replication, which in turn enables companies to economically deploy DR [disaster recovery] sites,” he says.
Rolland also links two technologies that will no doubt make my list of The Hottest Storage Technologies for 2011 (assuming I get around to making such a list): data deduplication and cloud storage.
“Dedupe is an enabler for cloud storage,” says Rolland. “It makes it practical to deploy cloud storage because you’re sending, say, 10x less data over the WAN. That has significant implications for deploying cloud-based DR.”
(Sepaton bundles data deduplication software with its virtual tape libraries, or VTLs.)
Meanwhile, Quantum released the results of an end-user survey this week that suggests U.S. companies could save $6 billion annually in file restore costs by adopting deduplication.
According to the survey of 300 IT professionals, respondents spend an average of 131 hours annually on file restore activities, with 65% restoring files at least once a week. Based on the average wage for IT professionals in the US ($31.55 per hour according to PayScale.com), that equates to $9.5 billion. However, Quantum’s survey also found that those companies that are most efficient at file restoration predominantly use deduplication and can complete restores in approximately one-third the average time of all respondents. So, according to Quantum’s press release: “If the broader US market was to achieve similar data restore efficiencies, the potential annual savings for US businesses would be approximately $6 billion.”
This survey seems a bit misleading to me because it’s not really focused on the advantages of data deduplication per se in a file restore context but, rather, the advantages of disk-based backup/recovery.
Steve Whitner, Quantum’s product marketing manager for DXi, explains: “If you back up to regular [non-deduplicated] disk and you have a need for DR, you have to get that data to another site and you can’t keep data on conventional disk for very long – maybe a few days or a week. So the real issue is not the speed of restore; it’s the fact that companies can now store a month or two of deduplicated backup data on disk.”
You be the judge. Here’s Quantum’s press release and here are some supporting slides from the survey results.
One thing is clear: In 2011, the focus will shift from deduplication for nearline/secondary storage to deduplication for primary storage. Witness two of this year’s biggest storage acquisitions: Dell buying Ocarina Networks and IBM acquiring Storwize. (Storwize’s technology is now in the IBM Real-time Compression business unit.)
Related blog posts:
What is progressive deduplication?
Data deduplication: Permabit finds success with OEM model
“Tier 1 storage vendors will move past point solutions for deduplication next year,” says Tom Cook, CEO at Permabit. “They’re working toward end-to-end deduplication, across SAN, NAS, unified [block and file], nearline and backup.”
“When that happens, once their customers ingest data and get it into a deduplicated state they’ll never have to re-hydrate that data throughout its lifecycle. The data will stay deduplicated through processes such as replication and backup. That’s a huge savings in workflow, footprint and bandwidth,” say Cook.
“Today, the big vendors use a variety of point solutions, but they’d like to use a single data optimization product across all their platforms, whether it’s block or file, primary or secondary. End-to-end deduplication will creep into the market in 2011 and 2012,” Cook predicts. (Permabit sells deduplication software – dubbed Albireo – to OEMs.)
Personally, I don’t think that single-solution, end-to-end deduplication will happen that quickly, in part because of the huge investments that the Tier 1 vendors have made in their “point solutions,” but we’ll see.
Dennis Rolland, director of advanced technology at Sepaton, has some predictions that are similar to Cook’s, as well as some differing opinions regarding trends in the data deduplication market.
“Dedupe will be required in more places going forward, including primary storage in addition to nearline storage, and end users will have to cut down on how many dedupe solutions they have because of the complexity in managing many disparate solutions,” says Rolland, “but we’ll probably still have distinct solutions for primary and nearline storage deduplication.”
Rolland thinks that the emphasis on deduplication benefits such as capacity, footprint and cost savings is shifting. “Dedupe enables low-bandwidth replication, which in turn enables companies to economically deploy DR [disaster recovery] sites,” he says.
Rolland also links two technologies that will no doubt make my list of The Hottest Storage Technologies for 2011 (assuming I get around to making such a list): data deduplication and cloud storage.
“Dedupe is an enabler for cloud storage,” says Rolland. “It makes it practical to deploy cloud storage because you’re sending, say, 10x less data over the WAN. That has significant implications for deploying cloud-based DR.”
(Sepaton bundles data deduplication software with its virtual tape libraries, or VTLs.)
Meanwhile, Quantum released the results of an end-user survey this week that suggests U.S. companies could save $6 billion annually in file restore costs by adopting deduplication.
According to the survey of 300 IT professionals, respondents spend an average of 131 hours annually on file restore activities, with 65% restoring files at least once a week. Based on the average wage for IT professionals in the US ($31.55 per hour according to PayScale.com), that equates to $9.5 billion. However, Quantum’s survey also found that those companies that are most efficient at file restoration predominantly use deduplication and can complete restores in approximately one-third the average time of all respondents. So, according to Quantum’s press release: “If the broader US market was to achieve similar data restore efficiencies, the potential annual savings for US businesses would be approximately $6 billion.”
This survey seems a bit misleading to me because it’s not really focused on the advantages of data deduplication per se in a file restore context but, rather, the advantages of disk-based backup/recovery.
Steve Whitner, Quantum’s product marketing manager for DXi, explains: “If you back up to regular [non-deduplicated] disk and you have a need for DR, you have to get that data to another site and you can’t keep data on conventional disk for very long – maybe a few days or a week. So the real issue is not the speed of restore; it’s the fact that companies can now store a month or two of deduplicated backup data on disk.”
You be the judge. Here’s Quantum’s press release and here are some supporting slides from the survey results.
One thing is clear: In 2011, the focus will shift from deduplication for nearline/secondary storage to deduplication for primary storage. Witness two of this year’s biggest storage acquisitions: Dell buying Ocarina Networks and IBM acquiring Storwize. (Storwize’s technology is now in the IBM Real-time Compression business unit.)
Related blog posts:
What is progressive deduplication?
Data deduplication: Permabit finds success with OEM model
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
What is progressive deduplication?
October 19, 2010 -- Arkeia Software is putting the final touches on the 9.0 release of its Arkeia Network Backup software, which the company plans to deliver in the first quarter of next year, possibly by mid-January. We'll cover that release in more detail as the company gets closer to shipping, but for now . . .
The key addition to the 9.0 release is a technology that Arkeia now refers to as "progressive deduplication," which was previously called "sliding window with progressive matching deduplication."
You'd have to be a math wiz to understand this technology from an algorithmic perspective, but here are the basics, culled from a recent conversation with Arkeia CEO Bill Evans:
Progressive deduplication is an alternative to the older fixed-block deduplication and the newer, more common variable-block deduplication.
Arkeia's data deduplication implementation is global (vs. local), byte-level (vs. file-level), source-side (vs. target-side, although it supports both approaches as well as a mix), in-line (vs. post-processing), and content-aware. But the real differentiator is in how the software handles block sizes.
As with variable-block deduplication, the block size can be adjusted for optimal deduplication ratios, but Arkeia claims a "better" implementation that is more content-aware (or application-aware) than existing approaches. Arkeia Network Backup 9.0 software automatically adjusts block sizes based on file type in order to maximize dedupe ratios.
Arkeia acquired the data dedupe technology when it bought Kadena Systems about a year ago.
Arkeia claims two key advantages of progressive dedupe vs. traditional variable-block dedupe: It's faster (which reduces the size of backup windows) and it delivers higher deduplication ratios (which reduces storage capacity and network bandwidth requirements).
The company isn't ready to make specific performance or dedupe ratio claims, but CEO Evans reports that in internal tests using VMDK files the company achieved a 38% improvement in dedupe ratios compared to "one of the leading deduplication vendors" (which I assume to be either Data Domain or Quantum).
"We think we'll have better dedupe ratios than any other vendor," says Evans.
The proof will be in the pudding. Until we get some independent benchmark results, we'll have to take these claims with a grain of salt, but progressive deduplication appears to be an interesting technology that could take deduplication to a new level.
The Arkeia Deduplication Option will be priced at $2,000 per media, server, but will be free for companies that license Arkeia's software or appliances (physical or virtual) by December 31.
To participate in the beta program for Arkeia Network Backup 9.0 and the progressive deduplication technology, click here.
Next month, Arkeia will release a deduplication profiling tool that will enable users to measure actual deduplication ratios at various block sizes to determine the optimal block size for each file type.
Related articles:
Arkeia integrates backup with VMware vStorage
Arkeia acquires Kadena for data dedupe
The key addition to the 9.0 release is a technology that Arkeia now refers to as "progressive deduplication," which was previously called "sliding window with progressive matching deduplication."
You'd have to be a math wiz to understand this technology from an algorithmic perspective, but here are the basics, culled from a recent conversation with Arkeia CEO Bill Evans:
Progressive deduplication is an alternative to the older fixed-block deduplication and the newer, more common variable-block deduplication.
Arkeia's data deduplication implementation is global (vs. local), byte-level (vs. file-level), source-side (vs. target-side, although it supports both approaches as well as a mix), in-line (vs. post-processing), and content-aware. But the real differentiator is in how the software handles block sizes.
As with variable-block deduplication, the block size can be adjusted for optimal deduplication ratios, but Arkeia claims a "better" implementation that is more content-aware (or application-aware) than existing approaches. Arkeia Network Backup 9.0 software automatically adjusts block sizes based on file type in order to maximize dedupe ratios.
Arkeia acquired the data dedupe technology when it bought Kadena Systems about a year ago.
Arkeia claims two key advantages of progressive dedupe vs. traditional variable-block dedupe: It's faster (which reduces the size of backup windows) and it delivers higher deduplication ratios (which reduces storage capacity and network bandwidth requirements).
The company isn't ready to make specific performance or dedupe ratio claims, but CEO Evans reports that in internal tests using VMDK files the company achieved a 38% improvement in dedupe ratios compared to "one of the leading deduplication vendors" (which I assume to be either Data Domain or Quantum).
"We think we'll have better dedupe ratios than any other vendor," says Evans.
The proof will be in the pudding. Until we get some independent benchmark results, we'll have to take these claims with a grain of salt, but progressive deduplication appears to be an interesting technology that could take deduplication to a new level.
The Arkeia Deduplication Option will be priced at $2,000 per media, server, but will be free for companies that license Arkeia's software or appliances (physical or virtual) by December 31.
To participate in the beta program for Arkeia Network Backup 9.0 and the progressive deduplication technology, click here.
Next month, Arkeia will release a deduplication profiling tool that will enable users to measure actual deduplication ratios at various block sizes to determine the optimal block size for each file type.
Related articles:
Arkeia integrates backup with VMware vStorage
Arkeia acquires Kadena for data dedupe
Monday, September 20, 2010
Data deduplication: Permabit finds success with OEM model
September 20, 2010 -- Following the blockbuster acquisitions of Ocarina by Dell and Storwize by IBM (well, pre-HP/3PAR they were blockbusters), all eyes were re-focused on the data deduplication space (aka data, or capacity, or storage optimization).
Around the same time (early summer), Permabit introduced an OEM version of its data deduplication software, dubbed Albierio, that storage hardware and software vendors can integrate into their products.
Permabit is among only a few "independent" deduplication vendors that are taking the OEM route rather than the acquisition route (although I still say the company is an attractive takeover candidate).
So far, Permabit's strategy seems to be paying off. The company has inked two OEM deals -- with BlueArc about a month ago and, today, Xiotech -- and I understand that Permabit has a few more OEM deals that will be announced over the next couple months.
Permabit claims zero performance degradation with its Albireo deduplication software, and both BlueArc and Xiotech officials cited Albireo's performance, as well as scalability and data "safety" (Albireo doesn't alter data) in announcing their OEM agreements. BlueArc and Xiotech are a good start for Permabit, although it's unclear how long it will take either vendor to integrate Albireo into their systems.
Both the BlueArc and Xiotech deals are focused on data deduplication for primary storage, as opposed to secondary or backup storage. That's where Permabit is currently focused, although Albireo software can be used across all storage tiers, and can be implemented with block, file or unified (block + file) storage.
I recently caught up with Tom Cook, Permabit's president and CEO, to talk about trends in the capacity optimization market.
I asked him about the fact that some of the large storage vendors seem to be embracing multiple capacity optimization techniques for different tiers of storage and, in some cases, carrying a mix of homegrown and OEM'd solutions for data deduplication and/or compression.
"We're still in the very early stages of data optimization, where you have single-function devices such as D2D and VTL appliances," says Cook. "But over time, the big players will try to get to a single data optimization solution that covers all storage tiers."
"Vendors will drive toward total efficiency, where's there's no re-hydration of data," says Cook. "And we believe that the best place to start is on primary storage. It's like New York: 'If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.'"
Related articles:
Dell to acquire Ocarina for data deduplication
IBM scoops up Storwize
Around the same time (early summer), Permabit introduced an OEM version of its data deduplication software, dubbed Albierio, that storage hardware and software vendors can integrate into their products.
Permabit is among only a few "independent" deduplication vendors that are taking the OEM route rather than the acquisition route (although I still say the company is an attractive takeover candidate).
So far, Permabit's strategy seems to be paying off. The company has inked two OEM deals -- with BlueArc about a month ago and, today, Xiotech -- and I understand that Permabit has a few more OEM deals that will be announced over the next couple months.
Permabit claims zero performance degradation with its Albireo deduplication software, and both BlueArc and Xiotech officials cited Albireo's performance, as well as scalability and data "safety" (Albireo doesn't alter data) in announcing their OEM agreements. BlueArc and Xiotech are a good start for Permabit, although it's unclear how long it will take either vendor to integrate Albireo into their systems.
Both the BlueArc and Xiotech deals are focused on data deduplication for primary storage, as opposed to secondary or backup storage. That's where Permabit is currently focused, although Albireo software can be used across all storage tiers, and can be implemented with block, file or unified (block + file) storage.
I recently caught up with Tom Cook, Permabit's president and CEO, to talk about trends in the capacity optimization market.
I asked him about the fact that some of the large storage vendors seem to be embracing multiple capacity optimization techniques for different tiers of storage and, in some cases, carrying a mix of homegrown and OEM'd solutions for data deduplication and/or compression.
"We're still in the very early stages of data optimization, where you have single-function devices such as D2D and VTL appliances," says Cook. "But over time, the big players will try to get to a single data optimization solution that covers all storage tiers."
"Vendors will drive toward total efficiency, where's there's no re-hydration of data," says Cook. "And we believe that the best place to start is on primary storage. It's like New York: 'If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.'"
Related articles:
Dell to acquire Ocarina for data deduplication
IBM scoops up Storwize
Monday, July 19, 2010
Dell to acquire Ocarina for data deduplication
July 19, 2010 – Dell dropped a bombshell on the data deduplication market today with the announcement that is has signed an agreement to buy Ocarina Networks. The amount of the deal was not disclosed (but I’m working on that). We’ll be following up on this announcement in the near future as we get more info, but for now:
Ocarina has content-aware storage optimization technology – data deduplication plus compression – that until recently it sold bundled in appliances. Less than a month ago, the company announced an embeddable version of its ECOsystem data reduction technology targeted at OEMs.
Since that announcement came amidst rumors that IBM was about to buy Storwize (an Ocarina competitor) for $140 million, the Ocarina announcement led to speculation about which vendors might adopt the technology, as well as which of Ocarina’s partners might acquire the company. (The IBM-Storwize rumor has, at least for now, fizzled out.)
In a blog on Ocarina’s announcement, I opined that HP might be interested in Ocarina (see “Ocarina: 4 dedupe predictions, and an OEM strategy,” a June 22 blog post). Along with EMC, Hitachi Data Systems, BlueArc and others, HP is one of Ocarina’s partners.
That level of perspicuity is why I don’t invest in storage vendors.
Until the announcement of the embeddable, OEM version of its software, Ocarina was known primarily as a vendor of data reduction technology for primary storage. But the embeddable version is applicable across the storage spectrum, from primary storage to backup and archive storage.
In Dell’s press release on the acquisition announcement, Ocarina CEO Murli Thirumale was quoted as saying “This brings deduplication to not only primary storage, but also to key storage workflows including backup, replication, migration and tiering.”
However, the release also stated that “Ocarina brings a leading deduplication capability to complement Dell’s EqualLogic solutions.” And Brad Anderson, senior vice president in Dell’s Enterprise Product Group, also singled out the EqualLogic product line in a quote: “Ocarina provides an important component of our data management portfolio and our EqualLogic ecosystem . . . .”
So, the Ocarina technology will be applied only to the EqualLogic line of iSCSI arrays? Or will it be applied across the board; in other words, all of Dell’s storage systems? And if the latter is correct, what does that mean for Dell’s existing data deduplication technologies and partners?
Will Dell still need deduplication partners CommVault and Symantec?
What are the implications for Dell’s reseller deal with EMC for Data Domain deduplication systems?
Will Dell eventually have one deduplication technology, or will the company maintain a menu of options?
Where does this leave other data reduction specialists, such as GreenBytes, Exar and Permabit, which recently announced an embeddable version of its storage optimization technology (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”)?
And how will the deduplication kingpins – NetApp and EMC – react?
For now, more questions than answers.
Related blog posts:
“Ocarina: 4 dedupe predictions, and an OEM strategy” (June 22)
IBM to acquire Storwize for $140 million? (June 14)
And here's a blog post on the Dell-Ocarina acquisition from David West, CommVault's vice president of marketing and business development: http://news.commvault.com/DavidWest/000049_A_Complementary_Approach_to_Deduplication.asp
Ocarina has content-aware storage optimization technology – data deduplication plus compression – that until recently it sold bundled in appliances. Less than a month ago, the company announced an embeddable version of its ECOsystem data reduction technology targeted at OEMs.
Since that announcement came amidst rumors that IBM was about to buy Storwize (an Ocarina competitor) for $140 million, the Ocarina announcement led to speculation about which vendors might adopt the technology, as well as which of Ocarina’s partners might acquire the company. (The IBM-Storwize rumor has, at least for now, fizzled out.)
In a blog on Ocarina’s announcement, I opined that HP might be interested in Ocarina (see “Ocarina: 4 dedupe predictions, and an OEM strategy,” a June 22 blog post). Along with EMC, Hitachi Data Systems, BlueArc and others, HP is one of Ocarina’s partners.
That level of perspicuity is why I don’t invest in storage vendors.
Until the announcement of the embeddable, OEM version of its software, Ocarina was known primarily as a vendor of data reduction technology for primary storage. But the embeddable version is applicable across the storage spectrum, from primary storage to backup and archive storage.
In Dell’s press release on the acquisition announcement, Ocarina CEO Murli Thirumale was quoted as saying “This brings deduplication to not only primary storage, but also to key storage workflows including backup, replication, migration and tiering.”
However, the release also stated that “Ocarina brings a leading deduplication capability to complement Dell’s EqualLogic solutions.” And Brad Anderson, senior vice president in Dell’s Enterprise Product Group, also singled out the EqualLogic product line in a quote: “Ocarina provides an important component of our data management portfolio and our EqualLogic ecosystem . . . .”
So, the Ocarina technology will be applied only to the EqualLogic line of iSCSI arrays? Or will it be applied across the board; in other words, all of Dell’s storage systems? And if the latter is correct, what does that mean for Dell’s existing data deduplication technologies and partners?
Will Dell still need deduplication partners CommVault and Symantec?
What are the implications for Dell’s reseller deal with EMC for Data Domain deduplication systems?
Will Dell eventually have one deduplication technology, or will the company maintain a menu of options?
Where does this leave other data reduction specialists, such as GreenBytes, Exar and Permabit, which recently announced an embeddable version of its storage optimization technology (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”)?
And how will the deduplication kingpins – NetApp and EMC – react?
For now, more questions than answers.
Related blog posts:
“Ocarina: 4 dedupe predictions, and an OEM strategy” (June 22)
IBM to acquire Storwize for $140 million? (June 14)
And here's a blog post on the Dell-Ocarina acquisition from David West, CommVault's vice president of marketing and business development: http://news.commvault.com/DavidWest/000049_A_Complementary_Approach_to_Deduplication.asp
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Ocarina: 4 dedupe predictions, and an OEM strategy
June 22, 2010 – A couple of recent news announcements/rumors have focused attention on data reduction (compression/deduplication) for primary storage, also referred to as primary storage optimization, capacity optimization, storage efficiency, and many other terms that may be confusing end users.
First, Permabit announced a software-only version of its data deduplication technology designed for storage hardware and software OEMs (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”). If Permabit succeeds in nailing a major OEM deal or two (and the company claims to have at least one in the works) this could be a game changer. For a second opinion on that, see Jeff Boles’ blog post.
Second, the rumors are still swirling around IBM’s alleged negotiations to buy primary storage compression specialist Storwize (see “IBM to acquire Storwize for $140 million?”).
I recently spoke to Murli Thirumale, CEO at Ocarina Networks, which is a Storwize competitor and soon-to-be Permabit competitor. Leading up to a product/strategy announcement that Ocarina made today (see below), Murli offered four predictions on data reduction for primary storage:
--“Every major storage vendor will have primary storage deduplication in their portfolio by 2011, whether by building it or buying it. And by 2012 every major host vendor – including servers and virtualization platforms – will have data reduction built in.”
--“The compression vs. deduplication argument will go away as users realize that you need both. Each technology has advantages/disadvantages for different data types and access patterns.” [Ocarina’s technology combines compression and deduplication.]
--“The industry will eventually have solutions integrated across all tiers of storage, rather than point solutions for different tiers. You shouldn’t have to re-hydrate across tiers or workflows. Once you shrink the data, keep it shrunk.”
--“Deduplication is not a feature; it’s a business. The data deduplication market will exceed $3 billion within five years. And I think it will ramp faster on primary storage than it did in the backup market.”
Which sort of leads into the announcement that Ocarina made today. In a strategy similar to Permabit’s, Ocarina announced a software-only, ‘embeddable’ version of its ECOsystem data reduction technology targeted at OEMs. (Ocarina’s existing data reduction technology is delivered as a software-hardware appliance.)
Ocarina may not be a household name, but note that its partners/resellers include, among others, HP, EMC, Hitachi Data Systems and BlueArc, although Ocarina didn’t make any OEM announcements for its embeddable software today. (It takes a long time to qualify and integrate technology like this into a vendor’s existing stack.)
One differentiator that Ocarina may have is a content-aware data reduction technology with a combination of data compression and deduplication. In addition, Ocarina CEO Thirumale says that the OEM version of the company’s technology can be applied anywhere in the IT infrastructure – from primary storage devices to archiving platforms – and on any type of data (e.g., files or blocks), enabling data to remain in compressed/deduped form throughout its lifecycle. In addition, the software can be implemented in a post-process, in-band or hybrid approach.
In other data deduplication news today, GreenBytes announced its entry into the European market with a variety of reseller partnerships. GreenBytes packages its data deduplication software in inline GB-X appliances that combine solid-state disk (SSD) drives and 2.5-inch SATA drives in what the company refers to as a Hybrid Storage Architecture (HSA). GreenBytes’ block-level deduplication can be used in NAS or SAN environments.
First, Permabit announced a software-only version of its data deduplication technology designed for storage hardware and software OEMs (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”). If Permabit succeeds in nailing a major OEM deal or two (and the company claims to have at least one in the works) this could be a game changer. For a second opinion on that, see Jeff Boles’ blog post.
Second, the rumors are still swirling around IBM’s alleged negotiations to buy primary storage compression specialist Storwize (see “IBM to acquire Storwize for $140 million?”).
I recently spoke to Murli Thirumale, CEO at Ocarina Networks, which is a Storwize competitor and soon-to-be Permabit competitor. Leading up to a product/strategy announcement that Ocarina made today (see below), Murli offered four predictions on data reduction for primary storage:
--“Every major storage vendor will have primary storage deduplication in their portfolio by 2011, whether by building it or buying it. And by 2012 every major host vendor – including servers and virtualization platforms – will have data reduction built in.”
--“The compression vs. deduplication argument will go away as users realize that you need both. Each technology has advantages/disadvantages for different data types and access patterns.” [Ocarina’s technology combines compression and deduplication.]
--“The industry will eventually have solutions integrated across all tiers of storage, rather than point solutions for different tiers. You shouldn’t have to re-hydrate across tiers or workflows. Once you shrink the data, keep it shrunk.”
--“Deduplication is not a feature; it’s a business. The data deduplication market will exceed $3 billion within five years. And I think it will ramp faster on primary storage than it did in the backup market.”
Which sort of leads into the announcement that Ocarina made today. In a strategy similar to Permabit’s, Ocarina announced a software-only, ‘embeddable’ version of its ECOsystem data reduction technology targeted at OEMs. (Ocarina’s existing data reduction technology is delivered as a software-hardware appliance.)
Ocarina may not be a household name, but note that its partners/resellers include, among others, HP, EMC, Hitachi Data Systems and BlueArc, although Ocarina didn’t make any OEM announcements for its embeddable software today. (It takes a long time to qualify and integrate technology like this into a vendor’s existing stack.)
One differentiator that Ocarina may have is a content-aware data reduction technology with a combination of data compression and deduplication. In addition, Ocarina CEO Thirumale says that the OEM version of the company’s technology can be applied anywhere in the IT infrastructure – from primary storage devices to archiving platforms – and on any type of data (e.g., files or blocks), enabling data to remain in compressed/deduped form throughout its lifecycle. In addition, the software can be implemented in a post-process, in-band or hybrid approach.
In other data deduplication news today, GreenBytes announced its entry into the European market with a variety of reseller partnerships. GreenBytes packages its data deduplication software in inline GB-X appliances that combine solid-state disk (SSD) drives and 2.5-inch SATA drives in what the company refers to as a Hybrid Storage Architecture (HSA). GreenBytes’ block-level deduplication can be used in NAS or SAN environments.
Monday, June 14, 2010
IBM to acquire Storwize for $140 million?
June 14, 2010 (Updated June 15) – Rumors swirled this week around speculation that IBM is in talks to acquire startup Storwize, which specializes in data compression/reduction for primary storage, for a reported $140 million. I wasn’t able to confirm the rumor, but I have no doubt it’s true (the talking part, although not necessarily the acquisition part).
The potential deal makes sense for a number of reasons:
One: Data reduction for primary storage is going to take off big time this year. Heavyweights EMC and, more so, NetApp have capitalized on this trend with data deduplication techniques for data reduction. IBM has data deduplication for secondary storage via its acquisition of Diligent Technologies, but has been out of the picture when it comes to data reduction for primary storage. And buying Storwize (already an IBM partner) will get Big Blue into the game faster than developing the technology on its own.
Although it’s based on compression, not data deduplication, Storwize’s technology (Random Access Compression Engine, or RACE) can be used in conjunction with data deduplication products such as those from EMC and NetApp.
Two: IBM has plenty of experience acquiring Israeli companies. In addition to Diligent, IBM acquired Israel-based XIV in 2008. (Storwize’s R&D facility is in Israel, although the company now has U.S. headquarters.)
Three: IBM has already been reselling Storwize’s STN appliances, and has jointly presented Webcasts with Storwize and produced white papers legitimizing Storwize’s various claims, including the claim that its compression appliances can reduce capacity by 50% to 90% without negatively affecting performance.
Four: It hasn’t been a secret that Storwize has been shopping itself for some time. Getting acquired makes more sense than trying to go it alone in the primary storage optimization market, which will be ruled by the big boys – not startups (just my opinion, but I’m right.)
This acquisition would be interesting on a number of fronts.
--Would it lead to HP acquiring partner Ocarina Networks, a Storwize competitor?
--And let's not forget about other players in the primary storage optimization space. Exar (via its acquisition of Hifn) has data reduction technology that combines data deduplication and compression and handles those functions at the ASIC level. And GreenBytes has inline deduplication ttechnology that can be applied to NAS or SAN environments.
--Could IBM’s offer lead to a bidding war? Perhaps between Big Blue, EMC, NetApp and/or HP?
Further fueling the flames in this market was Permabit’s announcement of its Albireo technology last week (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”). Albireo is a software-only deduplication technology designed specifically for primary storage, and the company claims to have a number of design wins, with at least one rumored to be with a big vendor. Who could that be?
This could get even more interesting than last year’s NetApp-EMC bidding war for Data Domain.
Related articles:
Data reduction for primary storage: Benefits and options
Storwize upgrades compression appliances
Infineta unveils deduplication for inter-data-center traffic
GreenByes launches entry-level dedupe appliance
Nexenta debuts ZFS-based in-line deduplication
The potential deal makes sense for a number of reasons:
One: Data reduction for primary storage is going to take off big time this year. Heavyweights EMC and, more so, NetApp have capitalized on this trend with data deduplication techniques for data reduction. IBM has data deduplication for secondary storage via its acquisition of Diligent Technologies, but has been out of the picture when it comes to data reduction for primary storage. And buying Storwize (already an IBM partner) will get Big Blue into the game faster than developing the technology on its own.
Although it’s based on compression, not data deduplication, Storwize’s technology (Random Access Compression Engine, or RACE) can be used in conjunction with data deduplication products such as those from EMC and NetApp.
Two: IBM has plenty of experience acquiring Israeli companies. In addition to Diligent, IBM acquired Israel-based XIV in 2008. (Storwize’s R&D facility is in Israel, although the company now has U.S. headquarters.)
Three: IBM has already been reselling Storwize’s STN appliances, and has jointly presented Webcasts with Storwize and produced white papers legitimizing Storwize’s various claims, including the claim that its compression appliances can reduce capacity by 50% to 90% without negatively affecting performance.
Four: It hasn’t been a secret that Storwize has been shopping itself for some time. Getting acquired makes more sense than trying to go it alone in the primary storage optimization market, which will be ruled by the big boys – not startups (just my opinion, but I’m right.)
This acquisition would be interesting on a number of fronts.
--Would it lead to HP acquiring partner Ocarina Networks, a Storwize competitor?
--And let's not forget about other players in the primary storage optimization space. Exar (via its acquisition of Hifn) has data reduction technology that combines data deduplication and compression and handles those functions at the ASIC level. And GreenBytes has inline deduplication ttechnology that can be applied to NAS or SAN environments.
--Could IBM’s offer lead to a bidding war? Perhaps between Big Blue, EMC, NetApp and/or HP?
Further fueling the flames in this market was Permabit’s announcement of its Albireo technology last week (see “Permabit deduplicates primary storage”). Albireo is a software-only deduplication technology designed specifically for primary storage, and the company claims to have a number of design wins, with at least one rumored to be with a big vendor. Who could that be?
This could get even more interesting than last year’s NetApp-EMC bidding war for Data Domain.
Related articles:
Data reduction for primary storage: Benefits and options
Storwize upgrades compression appliances
Infineta unveils deduplication for inter-data-center traffic
GreenByes launches entry-level dedupe appliance
Nexenta debuts ZFS-based in-line deduplication
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Consider open source deduplication
May 18, 2010 – Some vendors (e.g., NetApp, EMC) give away data reduction (aka capacity optimization) technology, while other solutions for compression and data deduplication can get pretty expensive pretty quick. There’s another alternative: open source deduplication.
Vendors/organizations offering open source deduplication range from Oracle/Sun to Bacula, Nexenta and Zmanda to newcomer Opendedup.
I’m not very familiar with these products, but I recently read an article on open source deduplication on InfoStor sister site Enterprise Storage Forum.
Here are some quotes from some developers/execs involved with open source deduplication:
Opendedup developer Sam Silverberg: “SDFS has performance, scalability and cost advantages over many proprietary solutions, but I think proprietary solutions have some real technical benefits. Replication, source-based deduplication, and 24/7 phone support are not available today in open source solutions.”
Kern Sibbald, founder of Bacula.org and CTO of Bacula Systems: “Proprietary solutions are expensive and the source code is not available, so it is not easy to check or compare their performance. From the deduplication statistics that I have seen from proprietary vendors and those given by open source projects . . . I would say that the open source solutions stack up very well against the proprietary solutions.”
Chander Kant, CEO of Zmanda: “Over time, deduplication will become standard. Just like we have standard algorithms for compression today, there will be standard algorithms and formats for deduplication. And open source shines with standardization. So the future of deduplication is squarely with open source.”
Since I’m not familiar with these open source solutions, I don’t have an opinion (although I sincerely doubt that “the future of deduplication is squarely with open source.”) Then again, although the article doesn’t provide stats, it appears as though a lot of users are downloading this free code.
Read the full story on Enterprise Storage Forum: “Open Source Deduplication: Ready for Enterprises?”
Data deduplication news from InfoStor:
Quantum adds SMB mode to data deduplication lineup
Infineta unveils deduplication for inter-data-center traffic
EMC debuts Data Domain Global Deduplication Array
Vendors/organizations offering open source deduplication range from Oracle/Sun to Bacula, Nexenta and Zmanda to newcomer Opendedup.
I’m not very familiar with these products, but I recently read an article on open source deduplication on InfoStor sister site Enterprise Storage Forum.
Here are some quotes from some developers/execs involved with open source deduplication:
Opendedup developer Sam Silverberg: “SDFS has performance, scalability and cost advantages over many proprietary solutions, but I think proprietary solutions have some real technical benefits. Replication, source-based deduplication, and 24/7 phone support are not available today in open source solutions.”
Kern Sibbald, founder of Bacula.org and CTO of Bacula Systems: “Proprietary solutions are expensive and the source code is not available, so it is not easy to check or compare their performance. From the deduplication statistics that I have seen from proprietary vendors and those given by open source projects . . . I would say that the open source solutions stack up very well against the proprietary solutions.”
Chander Kant, CEO of Zmanda: “Over time, deduplication will become standard. Just like we have standard algorithms for compression today, there will be standard algorithms and formats for deduplication. And open source shines with standardization. So the future of deduplication is squarely with open source.”
Since I’m not familiar with these open source solutions, I don’t have an opinion (although I sincerely doubt that “the future of deduplication is squarely with open source.”) Then again, although the article doesn’t provide stats, it appears as though a lot of users are downloading this free code.
Read the full story on Enterprise Storage Forum: “Open Source Deduplication: Ready for Enterprises?”
Data deduplication news from InfoStor:
Quantum adds SMB mode to data deduplication lineup
Infineta unveils deduplication for inter-data-center traffic
EMC debuts Data Domain Global Deduplication Array
Monday, January 25, 2010
Users’ top storage technologies, vendors for 2010
January 25, 2010 – Results from a recent end-user survey conducted by TheInfoPro research firm included a few surprises regarding what technologies are “hot” and which vendors will be “winners” this year. TheInfoPro surveyed and interviewed storage professionals in the Fortune 1000 (F1000), as well as midsize enterprises (MSEs).
According to TheInfoPro’s Heat Index, which measures user demand for technologies -- as well as the relative size of market opportunities for vendors -- data deduplication and primary storage data reduction (or online data reduction) will top the needs of both F1000 companies and MSEs in 2010.
The data deduplication entry was predictable, but users’ prioritization of data reduction technologies for primary storage came as somewhat of a surprise to me.
Not for Anders Lofgren, TheInfoPro’s chief research officer. “It’s not surprising, because the emphasis is still on cost reduction. It’s all about managing capital costs on the hardware side and managing operating costs on the staffing side,” says Lofgren.
The list is growing, but early entrants in the online data reduction space include EMC and NetApp, as well as vendors such as Exar, greenBytes, and Storwize. (See “Consider data reduction for primary storage” ). In TheInfoPro survey, not surprisingly, EMC and NetApp were mentioned most frequently.
Also ranking high in the TheInfoPro’s Heat Index were the F1000’s planned use of solid-state disk (SSD) drives, 8Gbps Fibre Channel, and virtual server data management.
TheInfoPro’s Heat Indexes also indicate increased use of technologies such as thin provisioning, email archiving, information lifecycle management (ILM), storage resource management (SRM), automated tiering and provisioning, and backup management for virtual servers. Among SMEs, interest in block virtualization is picking up steam, and MSEs plan to expand their use of remote replication, 10GbE, and enterprise-class SAS drives.
Who are the “most exciting” storage vendors in 2010? Among MSEs, the top picks were somewhat surprising: Compellent, 3PAR and Hitachi Data Systems. The top three “in use” vendors were EMC, NetApp and Compellent.
Among Fortune 1000 firms, the most exciting storage vendors are EMC, NetApp and IBM. The InfoPro noted that:
--The acquisition of Data Domain boosted EMC’s data deduplication “in use” share in the Fortune 1000 from about 5% to 25%.
--In the F1000 space, EMC’s V-Max refresh rates appear to be driving the majority of SSD discussions. For example, SSD “in use” responses quadrupled from six months ago (albeit from a base of near zero).
--In email archiving, Symantec, EMC and IBM consistently placed at the top of end users’ lists. IBM’s “in use” activity in the F1000 grew the fastest, compared to TheInfoPro’s survey of six months ago, while both Symantec and CommVault also showed significant improvement.
Visit TheInfoPro’s site for more insights from the firms’ ongoing end-user surveys.
Related InfoStor post:
The top 5 storage technologies of 2009 (and 2010?)
According to TheInfoPro’s Heat Index, which measures user demand for technologies -- as well as the relative size of market opportunities for vendors -- data deduplication and primary storage data reduction (or online data reduction) will top the needs of both F1000 companies and MSEs in 2010.
The data deduplication entry was predictable, but users’ prioritization of data reduction technologies for primary storage came as somewhat of a surprise to me.
Not for Anders Lofgren, TheInfoPro’s chief research officer. “It’s not surprising, because the emphasis is still on cost reduction. It’s all about managing capital costs on the hardware side and managing operating costs on the staffing side,” says Lofgren.
The list is growing, but early entrants in the online data reduction space include EMC and NetApp, as well as vendors such as Exar, greenBytes, and Storwize. (See “Consider data reduction for primary storage” ). In TheInfoPro survey, not surprisingly, EMC and NetApp were mentioned most frequently.
Also ranking high in the TheInfoPro’s Heat Index were the F1000’s planned use of solid-state disk (SSD) drives, 8Gbps Fibre Channel, and virtual server data management.
TheInfoPro’s Heat Indexes also indicate increased use of technologies such as thin provisioning, email archiving, information lifecycle management (ILM), storage resource management (SRM), automated tiering and provisioning, and backup management for virtual servers. Among SMEs, interest in block virtualization is picking up steam, and MSEs plan to expand their use of remote replication, 10GbE, and enterprise-class SAS drives.
Who are the “most exciting” storage vendors in 2010? Among MSEs, the top picks were somewhat surprising: Compellent, 3PAR and Hitachi Data Systems. The top three “in use” vendors were EMC, NetApp and Compellent.
Among Fortune 1000 firms, the most exciting storage vendors are EMC, NetApp and IBM. The InfoPro noted that:
--The acquisition of Data Domain boosted EMC’s data deduplication “in use” share in the Fortune 1000 from about 5% to 25%.
--In the F1000 space, EMC’s V-Max refresh rates appear to be driving the majority of SSD discussions. For example, SSD “in use” responses quadrupled from six months ago (albeit from a base of near zero).
--In email archiving, Symantec, EMC and IBM consistently placed at the top of end users’ lists. IBM’s “in use” activity in the F1000 grew the fastest, compared to TheInfoPro’s survey of six months ago, while both Symantec and CommVault also showed significant improvement.
Visit TheInfoPro’s site for more insights from the firms’ ongoing end-user surveys.
Related InfoStor post:
The top 5 storage technologies of 2009 (and 2010?)
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
What is Dedupe 2.0?
September 28, 2009 – Dedupe 2.0 is a term used primarily by Permabit, and it involves extending the benefits of data deduplication across the entire storage environment – not just the traditional application of deduplication on secondary (backup/archive) devices but on primary storage devices as well.
And, yes, it has applicability to cloud storage, whether it’s internal/private or external/hosted. (Then again, what doesn’t have applicability to cloud storage these days?)
If reducing your overall storage costs by 10x or 20x via across-the-board deduplication and capacity optimization sounds appealing, you might want to view our recent Webcast, “Dedupe 2.0: The Benefits of Optimizing Primary and Secondary Storage.” It originally aired last week, but is accessible here.
Jeff Boles, a senior analyst with the Taneja Group research and consulting firm, addresses the IT challenges and issues and Mike Ivanov, vice president of marketing at Permabit, explores solutions.
And, yes, it has applicability to cloud storage, whether it’s internal/private or external/hosted. (Then again, what doesn’t have applicability to cloud storage these days?)
If reducing your overall storage costs by 10x or 20x via across-the-board deduplication and capacity optimization sounds appealing, you might want to view our recent Webcast, “Dedupe 2.0: The Benefits of Optimizing Primary and Secondary Storage.” It originally aired last week, but is accessible here.
Jeff Boles, a senior analyst with the Taneja Group research and consulting firm, addresses the IT challenges and issues and Mike Ivanov, vice president of marketing at Permabit, explores solutions.
Monday, July 20, 2009
VARs see improvements in Q3
July 20, 2009 – Robert W. Baird & Co. recently completed its quarterly survey of enterprise VARs, and although Q2 results were flat there is some optimism regarding the second half of this year – particularly regarding technologies such as, not surprisingly, data deduplication and thin provisioning.
The firm surveyed 47 IT resellers with total annual revenue of $11.4 billion and average revenues of $261 million per year.
Results for the second quarter were split, with 43% of the server/storage VARs below plan, 44% on plan, and 13% above plan. However, there were signs of optimism (albeit guarded) for the rest of the year, with more than 75% of the survey participants expecting Q3 to be flat or up and the remaining VARs reporting either limited visibility or expectations that Q3 will be worse than Q2.
Specifically, 54% of the survey respondents expect the third quarter to be the same as the second quarter in terms of revenue; 22% expect is to be more positive; 12% expect it to be more negative than Q2; and 12 % said that it was too early to tell.
In terms of technology, as in the previous few surveys, the hottest revenue growth opportunities lie in cost-saving, infrastructure-optimization technologies. In the storage sector, that means data deduplication and thin provisioning. (ok, maybe EMC’s acquisition of Data Domain was worth $2.1 billion, although I still say it wasn’t. See “EMC out-trumps NetApp, or not.” ) VARs also cited solid-state disk (SSD) drives as a growth technology.
In a more general sense, storage and virtualization are expected to be the strongest areas for IT spending, while PCs and servers are expected to remain relatively weak.
Server virtualization is increasingly seen as a “must have” technology, with 68% of the Baird survey respondents saying that server virtualization is in strong demand and the remaining 32% saying that it is ramping moderately. In a related finding, virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) is gaining momentum, with 62% of the resellers noting that VDI is either ramping moderately or experiencing strong growth – up from 39% in Baird’s Q1 survey.
Interestingly, in terms of vendor strength Baird analysts note that heavyweights such as EMC, Sun, HP, Dell and IBM lagged vendors of lower-cost, more innovative technologies, such as Compellent, LeftHand and Data Domain. Dell and IBM were particularly weak in Q2, with 83% and 69% of the VARs below plan, respectively. Conversely, Cisco and Compellent had notable sequential improvements in the reseller rankings, according to Baird analysts.
Finally, VARs ranked NetApp and LeftHand as “the most channel friendly vendors.”
The firm surveyed 47 IT resellers with total annual revenue of $11.4 billion and average revenues of $261 million per year.
Results for the second quarter were split, with 43% of the server/storage VARs below plan, 44% on plan, and 13% above plan. However, there were signs of optimism (albeit guarded) for the rest of the year, with more than 75% of the survey participants expecting Q3 to be flat or up and the remaining VARs reporting either limited visibility or expectations that Q3 will be worse than Q2.
Specifically, 54% of the survey respondents expect the third quarter to be the same as the second quarter in terms of revenue; 22% expect is to be more positive; 12% expect it to be more negative than Q2; and 12 % said that it was too early to tell.
In terms of technology, as in the previous few surveys, the hottest revenue growth opportunities lie in cost-saving, infrastructure-optimization technologies. In the storage sector, that means data deduplication and thin provisioning. (ok, maybe EMC’s acquisition of Data Domain was worth $2.1 billion, although I still say it wasn’t. See “EMC out-trumps NetApp, or not.” ) VARs also cited solid-state disk (SSD) drives as a growth technology.
In a more general sense, storage and virtualization are expected to be the strongest areas for IT spending, while PCs and servers are expected to remain relatively weak.
Server virtualization is increasingly seen as a “must have” technology, with 68% of the Baird survey respondents saying that server virtualization is in strong demand and the remaining 32% saying that it is ramping moderately. In a related finding, virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) is gaining momentum, with 62% of the resellers noting that VDI is either ramping moderately or experiencing strong growth – up from 39% in Baird’s Q1 survey.
Interestingly, in terms of vendor strength Baird analysts note that heavyweights such as EMC, Sun, HP, Dell and IBM lagged vendors of lower-cost, more innovative technologies, such as Compellent, LeftHand and Data Domain. Dell and IBM were particularly weak in Q2, with 83% and 69% of the VARs below plan, respectively. Conversely, Cisco and Compellent had notable sequential improvements in the reseller rankings, according to Baird analysts.
Finally, VARs ranked NetApp and LeftHand as “the most channel friendly vendors.”
Monday, July 13, 2009
EMC out-trumps NetApp, or not
July 13, 2009 – Now that the bidding battle for Data Domain is over, with EMC set to lay out a whopping $2.1 billion, the question is: What’s next?
To get the opinions of analysts such as the Enterprise Strategy Group’s Steve Duplessie and Wikibon.org’s Dave Vellante, check out senior editor Kevin Komiega’s blog post, “Is Data Domain a good fit for EMC?”
I draw two conclusions from this saga:
--EMC paid way too much
--NetApp did the right thing
I thought the original bid of $1.5 billion was too high, but $2.1 billion for a data deduplication vendor?? With some vendors giving away deduplication for free (most notably, EMC and NetApp) users’ expectations re the cost of deduplication are going down. I’m told that a Data Domain implementation can get real costly real quickly, but even EMC won’t be able to keep those margins up over the long run. As such, EMC’s ROI for Data Domain appears questionable. And that’s a lot of money to pay just to keep a technology out of a competitor’s hands. EMC may appear to be victorious, but it’s a Pyrrhic victory at best.
NetApp officials did the right thing by ditching their egos and walking away from the bidding war. In fact, you could almost argue that NetApp is the victor in this battle.
So what’s next for NetApp? The conventional wisdom is that the company must make acquisitions – particularly on the software front – to round out its IT stack and stay competitive with EMC, IBM, HP, etc. And if you cruise the blogs you’ll find that acquisition speculation tends to focus on vendors such as CommVault, FalconStor, etc. and primary storage optimization vendors such as Ocarina. That assumes that NetApp is as dizzy over dedupe as it appears to be.
My guess is that NetApp will resume its acquisition attempts, but not in the deduplication arena. I think we’re in for some more surprises, and probably in the near future.
And in unrelated news . . .
Also last week, Broadcom appears to have dropped its hostile takeover bid for Emulex after getting rebuffed yet again on its sweetened offer. Something tells me this one isn’t over yet. Broadcom needs Fibre Channel – or at least Fibre Channel over Ethernet – technology, and Emulex isn’t the only Fibre Channel expert in the OC.
To get the opinions of analysts such as the Enterprise Strategy Group’s Steve Duplessie and Wikibon.org’s Dave Vellante, check out senior editor Kevin Komiega’s blog post, “Is Data Domain a good fit for EMC?”
I draw two conclusions from this saga:
--EMC paid way too much
--NetApp did the right thing
I thought the original bid of $1.5 billion was too high, but $2.1 billion for a data deduplication vendor?? With some vendors giving away deduplication for free (most notably, EMC and NetApp) users’ expectations re the cost of deduplication are going down. I’m told that a Data Domain implementation can get real costly real quickly, but even EMC won’t be able to keep those margins up over the long run. As such, EMC’s ROI for Data Domain appears questionable. And that’s a lot of money to pay just to keep a technology out of a competitor’s hands. EMC may appear to be victorious, but it’s a Pyrrhic victory at best.
NetApp officials did the right thing by ditching their egos and walking away from the bidding war. In fact, you could almost argue that NetApp is the victor in this battle.
So what’s next for NetApp? The conventional wisdom is that the company must make acquisitions – particularly on the software front – to round out its IT stack and stay competitive with EMC, IBM, HP, etc. And if you cruise the blogs you’ll find that acquisition speculation tends to focus on vendors such as CommVault, FalconStor, etc. and primary storage optimization vendors such as Ocarina. That assumes that NetApp is as dizzy over dedupe as it appears to be.
My guess is that NetApp will resume its acquisition attempts, but not in the deduplication arena. I think we’re in for some more surprises, and probably in the near future.
And in unrelated news . . .
Also last week, Broadcom appears to have dropped its hostile takeover bid for Emulex after getting rebuffed yet again on its sweetened offer. Something tells me this one isn’t over yet. Broadcom needs Fibre Channel – or at least Fibre Channel over Ethernet – technology, and Emulex isn’t the only Fibre Channel expert in the OC.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Stick a fork in Data Domain
June 5, 2009 – Ah, the perils of blogging about an unfolding story. In case you missed it, data duplication darling Data Domain appears to have accepted NetApp’s revised acquisition offer, following EMC’s hostile bid, which followed NetApp’s original bid. See Kevin Komiega’s blog, “Data Domain sides with NetApp,” for the latest news on this intriguing saga.
For reasons that aren’t entirely clear to me, both suitors are offering $30 per share yet NetApp’s deal has been valued at $1.9 billion and EMC’s was valued at $1.8 billion. I guess that has to do with the fact that NetApp’s is a cash-and-stock deal and EMC’s is a pure-cash deal. Which also explains why EMC honcho Joe Tucci considers his company’s bid to be “superior” to NetApp’s.
I think the saga is over, with Data Domain going to NetApp, but some financial gurus think EMC will up the bid even higher or, less likely, that a third suitor (Hitachi?) will appear.
The continuing surge in Data Domain’s stock price – to $32.51 today – suggests that investors expect an even higher bid, presumably from EMC.
Some bloggers have speculated that EMC never really wanted Data Domain, and that EMC made its offer just to drive the acquisition price up and stick it to NetApp. Does anybody really think that EMC is that frivolous? On the other hand, does EMC really need yet another deduplication option?
One problem with scenarios like this is that they set the blogging world on fire, with rampant guessing on what EMC (or NetApp) will do if it loses, or drops out of, the bidding war. Acquire another deduplication vendor? (FalconStor? Ocarina? Storwize?). I doubt it.
What has me scratching my head is the size of this deal: almost $2 billion (or more if the bidding war continues) for a technology that is a feature, not a market. Not to mention a feature that some vendors (NetApp and EMC) give away for free. How much margin will there be in this space once users expect the technology for free, or at least very inexpensively?
And just how popular is data deduplication? Sure, I’ve read all the (vendor commissioned) surveys that suggest that deduplication is the hottest technology in the storage market.
However, consider this: Apptio, which provides IT cost-optimization services among other things, is about to release the results of an end-user survey that says that storage is the next place IT organizations will analyze for cost savings. About 38% of Apptio’s customers are looking to reduce storage-related costs (which seems to me like an awfully low percentage). Of those companies:
--Almost 80% are analyzing tiered storage
--43% are analyzing low-cost archiving and backup options, including cloud storage
--And only 15% are considering data deduplication
According to Apptio’s PR agency, the company will be posting the full results of the survey on its Lean IT blog in the next week or so.
For reasons that aren’t entirely clear to me, both suitors are offering $30 per share yet NetApp’s deal has been valued at $1.9 billion and EMC’s was valued at $1.8 billion. I guess that has to do with the fact that NetApp’s is a cash-and-stock deal and EMC’s is a pure-cash deal. Which also explains why EMC honcho Joe Tucci considers his company’s bid to be “superior” to NetApp’s.
I think the saga is over, with Data Domain going to NetApp, but some financial gurus think EMC will up the bid even higher or, less likely, that a third suitor (Hitachi?) will appear.
The continuing surge in Data Domain’s stock price – to $32.51 today – suggests that investors expect an even higher bid, presumably from EMC.
Some bloggers have speculated that EMC never really wanted Data Domain, and that EMC made its offer just to drive the acquisition price up and stick it to NetApp. Does anybody really think that EMC is that frivolous? On the other hand, does EMC really need yet another deduplication option?
One problem with scenarios like this is that they set the blogging world on fire, with rampant guessing on what EMC (or NetApp) will do if it loses, or drops out of, the bidding war. Acquire another deduplication vendor? (FalconStor? Ocarina? Storwize?). I doubt it.
What has me scratching my head is the size of this deal: almost $2 billion (or more if the bidding war continues) for a technology that is a feature, not a market. Not to mention a feature that some vendors (NetApp and EMC) give away for free. How much margin will there be in this space once users expect the technology for free, or at least very inexpensively?
And just how popular is data deduplication? Sure, I’ve read all the (vendor commissioned) surveys that suggest that deduplication is the hottest technology in the storage market.
However, consider this: Apptio, which provides IT cost-optimization services among other things, is about to release the results of an end-user survey that says that storage is the next place IT organizations will analyze for cost savings. About 38% of Apptio’s customers are looking to reduce storage-related costs (which seems to me like an awfully low percentage). Of those companies:
--Almost 80% are analyzing tiered storage
--43% are analyzing low-cost archiving and backup options, including cloud storage
--And only 15% are considering data deduplication
According to Apptio’s PR agency, the company will be posting the full results of the survey on its Lean IT blog in the next week or so.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
NetApp + Data Domain: Overlap is ok
May 26, 2009 – Even after a long holiday weekend, the industry continues to debate the wisdom and ramifications of NetApp’s proposed acquisition of Data Domain. For our news coverage, see “NetApp shells out $1.5 billion for Data Domain.” And for reaction from analysts and competitors, see Kevin Komiega’s blog post, “NetApp’s competitors take aim at Data Domain deal.”
I agree with the general consensus that, in today’s economy, NetApp may have overpaid. (The buyout price was $25 per share, about a 40% premium over Data Domain’s closing price prior to the announcement.) But I disagree with some of the other commentary.
For example, some analysts, such as Wikibon.org’s David Vellante, predict that the “vision will take forever to execute.” If this was the same technological hurdle that NetApp faced with its acquisition of, say, Spinnaker, I’d agree. But it isn’t. In fact, they don’t even have to integrate the NetApp and Data Domain deduplication technologies.
Which brings me to another commentary on the deal; namely, that there’s overlap between the two vendors’ data-reduction product lines. Yes, there’s overlap, but that doesn’t mean that NetApp will have to jettison any products.
In the classic situation of product overlap after an acquisition, the conventional wisdom is to eliminate the overlap. But in this case it’s just another option for customers. In the case of data reduction for secondary or nearline storage, customers can opt for NetApp’s free dedeuplication technology, or, if they want higher performance or reduction ratios they can pay for the Data Domain technology. NetApp wins either way.
I don’t see any reason to kill product lines, so the product overlap objection seems to be a moot point. In fact, customers won’t even have to choose between the two product lines because they can be used in conjunction with each other.
Obviously, NetApp has to continue to branch out if it wants to be competitive with EMC, IBM, etc. What’s debatable is whether data deduplication (or data reduction in general) is a significant technology in the larger IT battle. I don’t think it is (because, as many have observed, it’s a feature and not a market), but to the degree that NetApp is right – that data deduplication is a linchpin technology -- the Data Domain deal is a good strategic move.
I agree with the general consensus that, in today’s economy, NetApp may have overpaid. (The buyout price was $25 per share, about a 40% premium over Data Domain’s closing price prior to the announcement.) But I disagree with some of the other commentary.
For example, some analysts, such as Wikibon.org’s David Vellante, predict that the “vision will take forever to execute.” If this was the same technological hurdle that NetApp faced with its acquisition of, say, Spinnaker, I’d agree. But it isn’t. In fact, they don’t even have to integrate the NetApp and Data Domain deduplication technologies.
Which brings me to another commentary on the deal; namely, that there’s overlap between the two vendors’ data-reduction product lines. Yes, there’s overlap, but that doesn’t mean that NetApp will have to jettison any products.
In the classic situation of product overlap after an acquisition, the conventional wisdom is to eliminate the overlap. But in this case it’s just another option for customers. In the case of data reduction for secondary or nearline storage, customers can opt for NetApp’s free dedeuplication technology, or, if they want higher performance or reduction ratios they can pay for the Data Domain technology. NetApp wins either way.
I don’t see any reason to kill product lines, so the product overlap objection seems to be a moot point. In fact, customers won’t even have to choose between the two product lines because they can be used in conjunction with each other.
Obviously, NetApp has to continue to branch out if it wants to be competitive with EMC, IBM, etc. What’s debatable is whether data deduplication (or data reduction in general) is a significant technology in the larger IT battle. I don’t think it is (because, as many have observed, it’s a feature and not a market), but to the degree that NetApp is right – that data deduplication is a linchpin technology -- the Data Domain deal is a good strategic move.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)