News
4/2/2008
11:41 PM
Terry Sweeney
Terry Sweeney
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

A Paradigm Spins Down

Which is better (and less cliché) than a paradigm that shifts, in my opinion. But based on public and private comments from readers, it's well past time to do away with these fault-prone spinning platters called storage arrays. Here's why.

Which is better (and less cliché) than a paradigm that shifts, in my opinion. But based on public and private comments from readers, it's well past time to do away with these fault-prone spinning platters called storage arrays. Here's why.This conversation -- that spinning drives are the data center's clunkiest dogs -- isn't a new one. But what it took to change the tenor of what's been repeated during the last five years was the voice a of a large and influential user. Specifically Google. About a year ago, the search engine giant released a study that severely undercut the performance guarantees of the major disk vendors.

Robin Harris covered this interesting issue in his Storage Mojo blog, and also included a thorough discussion of what's meant and implied in the terms mean time between failure (MTBF) and annual failure rates (AFR), two metrics that are the basis of vendor warranties.

Then, earlier this past March, some researchers from the University of Illinois did some piling on. Yes, disk failure contributes to 20% to 55% of storage subsystem failures; unfortunately, other physical interconnects like broken wires, shelf enclosure power outages, and HBA failures accounted for anywhere from 27% to 68% of problems. Ouch.

So as I look out on the horizon and see solid state, flash, even holographic storage, I wonder what it will take for the industry to wean itself off of spinning disk. Vendors have plenty invested in the systems and interfaces, not to mention a nasty dependence on the revenue stream they derive from these commodity products. Google and some academicians can't single-handedly shame makers of storage products away from disk. But they can shift the conversation so that there's discussion of amazing levels of reliability, rather than repair or replacement.

There's a paradigm that data center pros would be happy to adopt.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
Threat Intel Today
Threat Intel Today
The 397 respondents to our new survey buy into using intel to stay ahead of attackers: 85% say threat intelligence plays some role in their IT security strategies, and many of them subscribe to two or more third-party feeds; 10% leverage five or more.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-3341
Published: 2014-08-19
The SNMP module in Cisco NX-OS 7.0(3)N1(1) and earlier on Nexus 5000 and 6000 devices provides different error messages for invalid requests depending on whether the VLAN ID exists, which allows remote attackers to enumerate VLANs via a series of requests, aka Bug ID CSCup85616.

CVE-2014-3464
Published: 2014-08-19
The EJB invocation handler implementation in Red Hat JBossWS, as used in JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) 6.2.0 and 6.3.0, does not properly enforce the method level restrictions for outbound messages, which allows remote authenticated users to access otherwise restricted JAX-WS handlers ...

CVE-2014-3472
Published: 2014-08-19
The isCallerInRole function in SimpleSecurityManager in JBoss Application Server (AS) 7, as used in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (JBEAP) 6.3.0, does not properly check caller roles, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass access restrictions via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-3490
Published: 2014-08-19
RESTEasy 2.3.1 before 2.3.8.SP2 and 3.x before 3.0.9, as used in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) 6.3.0, does not disable external entities when the resteasy.document.expand.entity.references parameter is set to false, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files and have...

CVE-2014-3504
Published: 2014-08-19
The (1) serf_ssl_cert_issuer, (2) serf_ssl_cert_subject, and (3) serf_ssl_cert_certificate functions in Serf 0.2.0 through 1.3.x before 1.3.7 does not properly handle a NUL byte in a domain name in the subject's Common Name (CN) field of an X.509 certificate, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers...

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Dark Reading continuing coverage of the Black Hat 2014 conference brings interviews and commentary to Dark Reading listeners.