Tag: "Avamar"

Data Protection, Retention and Archive Starts with Data Value


 It feels good to open up the blogging again to new topics, especially ones I am intimately familiar with.  (But have no fear, there will be references to primary storage optimization / compression.)

This weekend I had an interesting conversation with my Dad.  We were discussing backup.  My dad basically runs IT for the State of Maine.  The State of Maine uses CommVault backup software.  So I posed the question to him, “What would it take for you to rip out CommVault and replace it with another solution.  He thought about it for a moment and replied “I wouldn’t”.  His answer came down to a couple of reasons.

First was the expense.  It’s not just about buying the new software, it would be training people to run the new software and it would be about throwing away the massive investment they have in their existing product as well as converting all the years of backup takes created with one software to the new software.  This is one of the biggest things vendors forget when trying to sell a customer on their backup software.

Second was the fact that, feature for feature, the top 5 traditional backup software products are not really that different from one another.  Sure, I do agree that some products have features that others don’t, and others products have features that work better than others, but in reality, the delta is so small and the workarounds are so simple it doesn’t really matter.  Unless your replacing traditional backup software with an evolutionary source based data deduplication software (which is only applicable for some environments) there is no advantage to switching software.

The challenge is if Data Protection is still one of the biggest and most expensive pain points within IT, how do the problems get resolved if replacing the software controlling it all is too costly to change?

PDF Creator    Send article as PDF   

Marketing, FUD and Doing What You Do Best


Rather than leave a lengthy comment on Tom Cook’s blog post from Friday Compression and Dedupe: Business Value and Data Safety (and from a marketing perspective, Friday’s are bad days to post blogs – especially in the summer) – I thought I would respond here (this may get lengthy as Tom made a number of points which I need comment on).

The first thing I do want to say is that when doing technical marketing; the proper strategy would be to not be on defense but rather take an offensive approach.  However, given the amount of FUD that Tom put in his latest blog post, I have to defend compression to some degree.

Now, I think we can all agree that data compression and data deduplication are two technologies that can complement one another very well.  Avamar (EMC) deduplicates the data at the source and then compresses the data before sending it to the Avamar Data Store gaining tremendous efficiency in network utilization.  ProtecTIER (IBM) compresses the data once it is deduplicated at the target device before it stores the data.  Other solutions also combine compression and data deduplication.

I’d like to comment on some key point Tom made in his piece where he is just blatantly wrong:

1)      Compression identifies redundant data across a very small window, usually 64 KB. – While this may be true for other compression technologies, this is not true for Storwize.  Storwize performs compression where the initial window is not fixed in size at all; it is the resultant write that is fixed in size.  This size is also specifically mapped to the I/O patter of the data being written.  The goal is such that in 1 I/O Storwize can do all the work it needs to on a particular file or LUN and it is for this reason Storwize has no performance penalty.

2)      Compression produces data reduction rates at most 2X for most data types. – Seems Tom needs a lesson in the most common answer in IT – “IT DEPENDS”.  Data compression ratios are 100% tied to the data type.  For a true indication of data compression ratios see Figure 1.

PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

Storage’s 2010 Hottest Technology


Each year there tends to be one technology that stands out in the storage space.  In 2009 it was data deduplication.  At the end of 2008 EMC made an acquisition of a source based deduplicaiton solution called Avamar.  Later, in 2009, they announced a strategic partnership with Quantum for data deduplication at the target.  Then in 2009 EMC made a bid against NetApp for Data Domain and won.  In addition, NetApp had data deduplication announcements with its ASIS technology.  Quantum, Falconstor, and Symantec all had their own story with data deduplication and a host of non-public companies such as Permabit, Sepaton, and Exagrid all were talking about the merits of data deduplication.

As the story goes, if you haven't put data deduplication in your backup environment yet you're either in an environment where there is not one iota of duplicate data, which is highly unlikely, or the company you work for has gobs of money and has no problem:

  1. Backing up to slow tape
  2. No worries about slow recovery from tape
  3. Keeping massive amounts of data on unreliable tape
  4. Backing up full streams of data to disk (and wasting valuable storage space)

What I am saying is that if you haven't implemented a data deduplication solution by now, you have been left in the technology dust.  Data deduplication just makes too much sense.  I know we have all heard the expression "No one ever got fired for buying X."  But has anyone ever got promoted because they bought X?  I have to believe that the IT team that can save their company 50% or more of their storage will get promoted.  Storage is a cost drain on IT.  It's the applications that make a company money.  Its time to start focusing some of those valuable IT dollars on the applications that make your company money, its time to be the IT Super Hero!

PDF Download    Send article as PDF   

The Myths about Compression and Data Deduplication


 How many of you have heard that compression and deduplication just don’t belong together?  Like oil and water.  I know from experience, when I worked for EMC, the Avamar sales reps and the Data Domain sales reps would tell their customers that the best thing to do if they had encrypted or compressed primary data, that they uncompress it to get the savings in their backups that deduplication promises.

This is wrong on a number of levels.  First, the shear nature of telling a customer to not compress primary storage data only to get down stream benefits is counter intuitive.  Second, if the customer has already changed their processes in order to accommodate compressed primary data, then the deduplication backup vendor is asking their customers to again change the customer’s process.  Not to mention it costs the customer more money in primary storage, and lastly undermines the decision made by the customer to compress the data in the first place.  If you really want to insult your customer, tell them the decision they made to save money was a bad one. Finally, all data deduplication technologies utilize LZ compression on their data ‘chunks’ to further reduce their data size, and then use this added compression benefit to talk about their deduplication ratios.

The reality is, with traditional compression implementations, the affects of deduplication are not significantly realized.  The reason is due to how traditional compression writes the files it compresses.  If a file is changed, from the point of the change, through the rest of the file, the new compressed file is essentially a new file.  When deduplication (even variable block deduplication) looks at this file and finds the initial changed blocks, the rest of the file will also be different and the deduplication ratios will be significantly reduced.  (Essentially it turns the highly affective ‘variable block’ deduplication into ‘fixed block’ deduplication and research shows that fixed block deduplication is 3 to 5 times less efficient than variable block deduplication.  Now that you’ve spent all that money for an expensive variable block solution, are you really getting the benefits?)

PDF    Send article as PDF   

Enterprise Data Protection at the Edge


What does that really mean?  When I worked for Veritas, back in 1998 we acquired a company based out of Canada called TeleBackup that backed up desktop / laptops.  In 1999 Veritas acquired Seagate and the Backup Exec product which also had a desktop / laptop option.  These products were meant to eventually be integrated into the main backup applications but never were.  Additionally, a lot of that software was given away (hard to make a business on that) and for the most part,  lived on a shelf somewhere and was never installed.

In 2004 I worked for Connected Corporate (acquired by Iron Mountain), who’s sole business was desktop / laptop backup.  (In fact, from 2000 to 2004 I worked as an analyst for ESG covering all the vendors in the backup space and used the Connected product to backup my work laptop – and it actually saved my hide once.)  While the company executed a successful exit, the business was (and probably still is) only about a $20M to $40M business.

Why do I bring this up?  There is a new reality in IT these days.  I have said it before, IT is accountable for 100% of the data created in any company, including that stored on desktop/laptops.  This means that not only do they have to provide a location to store this data but IT also needs to provide tools to protect this information and ensure that this information is highly recoverable for both business productivity purposes as well as corporate and legal governance.   This means that desktop / laptop backup is now gaining a lot more visibility in the enterprise.

However, desktop / laptop data protection is one of those areas in IT that is just a nuisance because it seems like it should be an easy problem to solve, but there are so many moving parts to it that it ends up falling by the wayside.

A successful desktop / laptop backup technology needs three very specific capabilities:

  • Integrate seamlessly with the existing backup solution in the enterprise
PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

Architecting for Recovery


Here is a shocker for you, backup IS a science.  Good backup administrators / architects are worth their weight in gold.  CIO’s just wish backup would go away.   Backup costs money, it’s not strategic, it chews up man power and when it is 'running' (successfully or not) no one really pays attention to it, but when it fails or more likely when you need to restore data and can't, someone can lose their job - so backup is VERY important, it is a science and to architect a backup environment correctly  it takes time, skill, money and someone who knows what they are dong.

Good backup administrators architect for recovery, not for backup.  Prove it you say.  Okay, question: “Why do backup administrators do full backups of Exchange every night?”  Answer - because it is way easier and much faster to perform a one step full recovery for Exchange than it is to lay down the weekly full and apply the incrementals.  Since mail is considered a “critical application” in the enterprise these days, and down time is critical for this application, good backup administrators architect for the least amount of downtime for the application.  This also applies to databases.  Ninety-five percent of all databases are actually snapped for quick recovery and I would also bet that a full backups is performed on them (or the snap) every evening.

Recovery is a primary driver of any good backup architecture but lately I have been hearing a great deal of talk around ‘backup consolidation’.  The reality is, there is no ‘one size fits all’ when it comes to backup software or hardware.  Consolidating backup software may make your environment easier to manage, but does it provide you the tools/technology you need to maximize your data protection objectives in your environment?  Consolidating backup targets (tape / disk) may yield fewer devices to manage, but what happens to your overall backup and recovery performance when doing so?  While new technologies may help fine-tune the science side of backup, they still need an artist’s touch.

PDF Download    Send article as PDF   

Comprehensive Capacity Optimization – Deduplication 2.0


Technology is great isn't it?  When someone thinks they have a new idea on the same old technology foundation they call it "X 2.0".  I have been watching the banter between analysts and vendors (specifically NTAP’s Dr. Dedupe and Permabit’s CEO Tom Cook) on the topic of Deduplication 2.0 and it is my belief that the proverbial boat is being missed (since we are using water analogies).  I have been watching these guys hash it out for the past few weeks and decided I have to jump in.  I find the real value to these conversations is the value to the end user.  At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who 'coined' or 'invented' a term (like deduplication 2.0) but what does matter is if  the term actually helps describe a technology and how that technology can be leveraged to make things better in the data center.  We should focus on the implications of this new generation of deduplication - ‘deduplication 2.0’.

In May I delivered a presentation to a number of EMC customers on the topic of Data Deduplication 2.0 - Comprehensive Capacity Optimization.  The point of my presentation was simple (and keep in mind this was before the Data Domain acquisition); there are a number of capacity optimization technologies/capabilities that are available to customers today.  Originally these deduplication technologies were used primarily for backup purposes but slowly, deduplication is making its way into primary storage. Deduplication in primary storage makes a lot of sense FOR DATA THAT IS STATIC.  Why only static data?  Static data is data that isn't used frequently (doesn't mean it's not important, it just simply is not accessed often); because access to this data is infrequent, the performance requirements for this data is less than that of active data. Remember; nothing in IT is free.  If I deduplicate data, in order to use it, I must ‘rehydrate’ it and thus there is a performance implication so I want to be careful where I deduplicate data so as not to inhibit performance on production data.

PDF Download    Send article as PDF   

The Side Effects of Backup on Server Virtualization


Server virtualization has changed the IT landscape dramatically.  It has become a magic potion curing a number of ills in the physical server world such as low individual CPU utilization and excess use of space, power and cooling in the data center.  However, like all potions that cure what ails you, there can be side effects.  You need to be careful of what the Witch Doctor orders.

When I speak with customers who have aggressively implemented a virtual server infrastructure, 9 out of 10 will tell me that they underestimated the affect that virtualization would have on their backups and backup process and how backup might actually make virtualization less of the magic potion they had hoped, when not considered during the virtual server assessment and planning process.  So what is the issue?  Backup is a virtualization bottleneck, and without addressing it, you may not be able to obtain the server consolidation ratios you had been expecting which can have a negative effect on your virtual server TCO and ROI.

This is a timely discussion as VMworld has just concluded.  VMware users flocked to VMworld looking for best practices when it comes to implementing virtual server technology.  Because virtualization allows IT to reduce the overall physical hardware infrastructure, users will be looking at how to maximize their server consolidation ratios (get as many virtual servers on a physical server as they can and still provide good application performance).

I often hear that companies assess their environments by looking at the production applications on their physical server environment, identify their work loads and translating that into some consolidation ratio of physical servers to virtual servers.  I also hear, from these same customers, that backup was never taken into consideration during the assessment phase when trying to identify the best possible consolidation ratios.  These customers implement their new virtual server environments, install the backup agent they had previously been using for physical server backups and attempt to backup their virtual servers and they find that they would only be able to protect 50% to 60% of the new environment.  Why?

PDF    Send article as PDF   

A Data Protection Reference Architecture – The Final Chapter


The Architecture

This ‘architecture’ diagram, as you can see, is not a typical architecture diagram, but hopefully it can be used to align your business and business objectives with the technologies that are available and can best be applied to solve your issues helping to balance, cost, complexity and compliance.

This diagram can also be used to do a couple of other things.  It can help you begin to classify your data and align your  data to your business objectives.  It also lets you begin to identify what data or data services in your environment that may be more important to you than others and based on this help you to choose areas you may want to outsource or move to the cloud.

As you can tell, there really is not one solution for meeting all your data protection needs.  The challenge comes with managing multiple solutions in an effort to meet your business objectives.  While there are only a few technologies available that allow you to manage your environment across all your RPOs and RTOs, it is important that I point out EMC’s NetWorker is able to do this, centralizing your data protection infrastructure  for ease of management.  It allows you to manage traditional backup, source based deduplicated backup with Avamar, CDP with RecoverPoint, as well as the EMC disk libraries and tape where the data is stored.  Now, I am not saying that NetWorker solves all of your data protection challenges, nor am I suggesting that replacing one traditional backup technology for another is the right answer, but what I am saying is that if you’re looking to have all the feature functionality required to meet all your business objectives and you want easier management, NetWorker is one avenue to get you there.  Additionally, the underlying image of the triangle represents data protection management.  Putting all the new technology in place is one thing, managing it, and ensuring you are now meeting your business needs is another.  EMC's Data Protection Advisor can help here as well.

PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

Storage Switzerland


One of the more thoughtful analysts in the industry, in my opinion is George Crump from Storage Switzerland.  (I like the name and George is as independent as you can get in

this business.)  Yesterday I had the pleasure of briefing George on EMC's Data Protection Vision.  I like talking with George for a couple of reasons.  First, he gets it.  What does that mean.  Read his material.  He is genuinely trying to educate IT folks on what is really important in the data center and how to address these challenges.  Next, he keeps the 'pay for', 'vendor spin' to a minimum.  George works hard to just talk about the facts of a product or industry and talk about how products can help without selling.  The reality is, we live in a great technological time.  The problem with IT is that only 50% of the problems are technology related.  The other 50%  is psychological.  IT can't just implement new technology because its cool or even because it really does solve a problem.  Sometimes new technology is too expensive to implement or the solution that is currently in place had a three year amortization and your only two years into your product life.  Or, more importantly, the new technology may be the greatest technology at the right price but it doesn't fit into the current IT priorities.  These are all things IT needs to work through when considering whether or not to invest in new technology.  The other thing George and I spoke about was the fact that it gets difficult to be 'strategic' in IT especially given certain economic times.  A lot of times IT just needs a band-aide or quick fix to move on to more important issues that really drive the business.  I talk about this  a lot, especially when it comes to backup.  Lets face it, it may not be what we all want to hear but backup is not strategic to most environments.  The applications that drive the business are most important.  Backup is about risk mitigation and information availability if everything else fails.  Right, 'if everything else fails', and IT typically invests in technology in the front end in an effort to have as little failure as possible.  Meaning, IT doesn't just buy JBOD with no RAID if they think the environment shouldn't be put at that kind of risk.  So IT is  already investing in some risk management up front which drives the spend on the back end for data protection.

PDF    Send article as PDF