New 3PAR F-Class Midrange Storage System Skews Towards Solving the Problems of Enterprise Storage Shops
Every time I run across an article that evaluates and ranks the latest midrange storage systems I always read it with a bit of a jaundiced eye. The latest lead article in the online March 2009 issue of Storage magazine is no exception. The article admirably tries to compare multiple midrange systems in an attempt to help users make an informed buying decision as to products that have proven their quality and reliability in actual use. Yet this article falls down in one important respect - it fails to take into account specific criteria for midrange storage systems that some enterprise storage shops will have.
Having sat in the decision-maker's seat before, I did not see mentioned in this report some of the criteria discussed that often influenced my buying decisions of midrange systems. Specific features that were becoming more important to me were how or if the midrange storage system would interface with a Tier 1 storage system or if the features that a midrange storage system possessed would give me the confidence to buy and use it in lieu of a Tier 1 storage system.
Of course, not every user or shop has the same criteria that I had for the purchase of midrange storage systems. In fact, this Storage magazine article plainly states that its results were skewed towards small and medium-sized enterprises (under $1 billion in revenue). But an organization that generates billions of dollars in revenue, supports mission-critical applications, or manages hundreds of TBs of data on different tiers of storage selects midrange storage systems based on a different set of criteria than what SMB shops might use.
Large organizations increasingly recognize that all storage systems that they bring into their environment need to be helping them build towards creating a more manageable and scalable storage environment. Specific key features that the storage system managers in these enterprise shops should now be looking for in midrange storage systems include:
The F-Class offers availability, reliability and performance features that are comparable to the T-Class though these features are, of course, scaled down since the F-Class is a midrange storage system. But what makes the F-Class notable is that it possesses the same software as the T-Class while the upper end F400 model delivers the same hardware architecture as the T-Class.
This combination of software and hardware features is important in two key ways. First, all of the T-Class' software features are available on both models of the F-Class so organizations can manage both F-Class and T-Class in the same manner to which they are accustomed now on the T-Class. In fact, they can even move data between these different models without requiring 3rd party replication tools.
Second, the T-Class' mesh-active controller architecture (this is 3PAR's new name for its controller architecture so if the name looks new, that's why) also found its way into the F400. This feature is truly a high-end feature as it makes each volume that is presented to servers active on each of the up to four controllers that the F400 supports. The Active-Active controller feature is one that you rarely find on midrange arrays with two controllers, much less four, so this is a radical departure (in a good way) from what other midrange systems can offer.
Many enterprise organizations are itching to bring midrange storage systems into their environment that they can manage as part of their broader Tier 1 storage infrastructure. The F-Class from 3PAR answers the demands of these organizations. Yes, SMB shops will likely still be attracted to the Tier 1 features and management characteristics that the F-Class offers and for these size shops looking for this type of solution, it certainly fits the bill. But when one looks at where the F-Class best fits and what problems it was designed to address, it certainly seems to skew towards solving the problems that enterprise storage shops possess.
Having sat in the decision-maker's seat before, I did not see mentioned in this report some of the criteria discussed that often influenced my buying decisions of midrange systems. Specific features that were becoming more important to me were how or if the midrange storage system would interface with a Tier 1 storage system or if the features that a midrange storage system possessed would give me the confidence to buy and use it in lieu of a Tier 1 storage system.
Of course, not every user or shop has the same criteria that I had for the purchase of midrange storage systems. In fact, this Storage magazine article plainly states that its results were skewed towards small and medium-sized enterprises (under $1 billion in revenue). But an organization that generates billions of dollars in revenue, supports mission-critical applications, or manages hundreds of TBs of data on different tiers of storage selects midrange storage systems based on a different set of criteria than what SMB shops might use.
Large organizations increasingly recognize that all storage systems that they bring into their environment need to be helping them build towards creating a more manageable and scalable storage environment. Specific key features that the storage system managers in these enterprise shops should now be looking for in midrange storage systems include:
- Interoperability with Tier 1 storage systems. Enterprise organizations are looking to making their environments easier to manage, not more complex. So while midrange systems are often less expensive than Tier 1 storage systems, they may force their administrators to learn new management interfaces, purchase new software to manage them and ultimately make their more environment more complex. Conversely, if the midrange system offers the exact same firmware, the same software features (thin provisioning, replication, snapshots, etc.) and management software, the management picture changes. Now organizations can manage them in the same way as, and even exchange data with, Tier 1 systems so the lower price of midrange systems looks even more appealing since organizations can manage them as part of their overall storage infrastructure.
- The same high availability, reliability and performance characteristics as Tier 1. Most of the time this is where midrange storage systems come up short. They can scale to ridiculous levels of capacity but then only offer 99.9% of uptime or only available in Active-Passive or Dual Active controller configurations. Even if a midrange storage system is available in an Active-Active controller configuration, the back-end LUN is still active on just one controller so there is no means to scale performance out to that configuration. Enterprise organizations sometimes need to opt for Tier 1 systems for these reasons simply because the application demands it and Tier 1 systems are the primary means to deliver it.
- A smooth upgrade path into a Tier 1 environment. This is where most midrange systems fall down. Applications rarely stay the same and yesterday's departmental application becomes today's mission critical application that is rapidly growing and requires constant uptime, more capacity and more performance. This often requires a painful data migration to move that application's data to a storage platform where it meets that application's new requirements.
The F-Class offers availability, reliability and performance features that are comparable to the T-Class though these features are, of course, scaled down since the F-Class is a midrange storage system. But what makes the F-Class notable is that it possesses the same software as the T-Class while the upper end F400 model delivers the same hardware architecture as the T-Class.
This combination of software and hardware features is important in two key ways. First, all of the T-Class' software features are available on both models of the F-Class so organizations can manage both F-Class and T-Class in the same manner to which they are accustomed now on the T-Class. In fact, they can even move data between these different models without requiring 3rd party replication tools.
Second, the T-Class' mesh-active controller architecture (this is 3PAR's new name for its controller architecture so if the name looks new, that's why) also found its way into the F400. This feature is truly a high-end feature as it makes each volume that is presented to servers active on each of the up to four controllers that the F400 supports. The Active-Active controller feature is one that you rarely find on midrange arrays with two controllers, much less four, so this is a radical departure (in a good way) from what other midrange systems can offer.
Many enterprise organizations are itching to bring midrange storage systems into their environment that they can manage as part of their broader Tier 1 storage infrastructure. The F-Class from 3PAR answers the demands of these organizations. Yes, SMB shops will likely still be attracted to the Tier 1 features and management characteristics that the F-Class offers and for these size shops looking for this type of solution, it certainly fits the bill. But when one looks at where the F-Class best fits and what problems it was designed to address, it certainly seems to skew towards solving the problems that enterprise storage shops possess.
Newsletter Signup
Leave a comment