<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Storage Architect &#187; Martin Glasborow</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thestoragearchitect.com/tag/martin-glasborow/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thestoragearchitect.com</link>
	<description>Storage, Virtualisation &#38; Cloud</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 22:20:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Enterprise Computing: The Wide Striping Debate</title>
		<link>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/07/12/enterprise-computing-the-wide-striping-debate/</link>
		<comments>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/07/12/enterprise-computing-the-wide-striping-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:17:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris M Evans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[GestaltIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EMC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hu Yoshida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Glasborow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[storagebod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Switch It On]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thin provisioning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wide Striping]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=638</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read with interest this week the posts on wide striping and the consequent expansion to thin provisioning.  Here are some of the highlights:</p> <p>First there&#8217;s Martin Glasborow&#8217;s <a rel="nofollow" href="http://storagebod.typepad.com/storagebods_blog/2009/07/wide-stripes.html" >post</a>, which discusses whether wide striping and thin provisioning should be chargeable items.  I&#8217;d go a step further than Martin and suggest that thin [...]<!--Begin ClixTrac.com Rotator Code -->
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.clixtrac.com/rotate/321"></script>
<!--End ClixTrac.com Rotator Code -->]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read with interest this week the posts on <strong>wide striping</strong> and the consequent expansion to <strong>thin provisioning</strong>.  Here are some of the highlights:</p>
<p>First there&#8217;s Martin Glasborow&#8217;s <a rel="nofollow" href="http://storagebod.typepad.com/storagebods_blog/2009/07/wide-stripes.html" >post</a>, which discusses whether wide striping and thin provisioning should be chargeable items.  I&#8217;d go a step further than Martin and suggest that thin provisioning (TP) should also be free; after all, over time thin provisioning becomes fat provisioning without some kind of reclaim technology and there&#8217;s only value to TP with something like Zero Page Reclaim to get back those unused blocks.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s Hu Yoshida&#8217;s <a href="http://blogs.hds.com/hu/2009/07/overheads-for-thin-provisioning.html" >post</a> referring to the Overheads of Thin Provisioning.  In it, Hu makes a very interesting claim that wide striped LUNs have <em>&#8220;greater protection from multiple disk failures&#8221;</em>.  On this point I have to <strong>disagree</strong>.  Firstly, if a disk fails within a RAID group, then the impact on a LUN is only experienced if the subsequent failure is also in the same RAID group.  <em>This is a fact whether then LUN is wide striped or not</em>.  For wide striped LUNs which are spread across multiple RAID groups, there&#8217;s <strong>more</strong> chance of a failure because a double disk failure could occur within <strong>any</strong> of the RAID groups supporting the presentation of that LUN.</p>
<p>In addition, wide striping has more <strong>impact</strong> if a failure occurs.  One benefit of having LUNs created from a single RAID group is that the impact of that RAID group failing is limited to only those LUNs.  Imagine a 300GB 3+1 RAID group divided into 18x 50GB LUNs.  Failure of that RAID group impacts only the 18 LUNs.  So, wide stripe across 10 RAID groups &#8211; now the impact of <strong>any</strong> RAID group failure is <strong>180</strong> LUNs.  Remember that&#8217;s <strong>any</strong> RAID group failure, which is much more likely as we have more RAID groups on which every LUN is dependent.</p>
<p>Finally there&#8217;s EMC and their free Virtual Provisioning &#8211; free that is on <strong>new</strong> purchases, not existing DMX-4 deployments.  While laudible, this offering is less generous compared to <a href="http://www.hds.com/go/free-storage-virtualization/" >HDS&#8217; Switch It On</a> promotion which offers free UVM, Dynamic Provisioning (first 10TB only) and Tiered Storage Manager on <strong>existing</strong> USP-V deployments.  </p>
<p>Wide striping and thin provisioning are clearly becoming features where vendors are looking to differentiate their products.  This must be vindication for the likes of 3Par who&#8217;ve had these features from day 1.</p>
<p>P.S.  You can find two EMC blogger references to the free Virtual Provisioning <a rel="nofollow" href="http://thestorageanarchist.typepad.com/weblog/2009/07/2015-challenge-accepted-free-vp.html" >here</a> and <a rel="nofollow" href="http://storagezilla.typepad.com/storagezilla/2009/07/virtual-provisioning-for-symm-included-at-no-extra-charge.html" >here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/07/12/enterprise-computing-the-wide-striping-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

