News
5/14/2009
08:50 AM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
50%
50%

Return On Efficiency

What if "do more with less" was more than a marketing phrase? What if you really could do more with less? There are storage solutions available now that really let you improve efficiency but one of the key components of deciding if a do more with less project is successful, is to measure the return on efficiency. For the dollars invested are you X more effective at your job?

What if "do more with less" was more than a marketing phrase? What if you really could do more with less? There are storage solutions available now that really let you improve efficiency but one of the key components of deciding if a do more with less project is successful, is to measure the return on efficiency. For the dollars invested are you X more effective at your job?For the rest of 2009 and probably most of 2010 you are going to be hearing a lot about efficient storage. When you hear the term efficient storage the vendor can mean one of three things. A solution that makes the disk capacity or utilization of that capacity more efficient, a solution that makes you more efficient or a solution that does both.

Measuring the return on efficiency in the first category, better utilization through either data reduction techniques like deduplication and compression or through archive techniques, is really a math problem to measure return on efficiency. This type of efficiency mostly affects CAPEX, and does not do much for OPEX. From an administrator perspective you are still managing the same total capacity, it just happens to fit in less physical space.

A potential exception is archive, as we mentioned in our Archive Basics article, archiving addresses both the CAPEX side of efficiency by reducing the investment in expensive tier one storage and the OPEX side of efficiency by moving data out of the primary path that is managed daily.

Other products address the OPEX side primarily and then often have an impact on the CAPEX side. Solutions like storage virtualization from vendors like DataCore, 3PAR and NetApp or large scale single filesystem NAS solutions like those from Isilon and IBRIX increase admin productivity by either reducing the amount of steps involved in the storage management process or by reducing the number of filesystems and storage systems to manage.

While in many cases the increased productivity by using these solutions is immediately obvious, ideally a baseline should be created so that an effective comparison of the before and after can be made. For example, document the life-cycle of a request for more storage. How long does it take to allocate additional storage or new storage to an application? Compare that to how one of these solutions would do it and the difference is your return. The difference being this measurement is in hours saved as opposed to GB's saved.

In our next entry will explore what is more important, storage CAPEX savings or storage OPEX savings?

Track us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/storageswiss.

Subscribe to our RSS feed.

George Crump is founder of Storage Switzerland, an analyst firm focused on the virtualization and storage marketplaces. It provides strategic consulting and analysis to storage users, suppliers, and integrators. An industry veteran of more than 25 years, Crump has held engineering and sales positions at various IT industry manufacturers and integrators. Prior to Storage Switzerland, he was CTO at one of the nation's largest integrators.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
10 Recommendations for Outsourcing Security
10 Recommendations for Outsourcing Security
Enterprises today have a wide range of third-party options to help improve their defenses, including MSSPs, auditing and penetration testing, and DDoS protection. But are there situations in which a service provider might actually increase risk?
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-0196
Published: 2015-06-29
CRLF injection vulnerability in IBM WebSphere Commerce 6.0 through 6.0.0.11 and 7.0 before 7.0.0.8 Cumulative iFix 2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via a crafted URL.

CVE-2015-0545
Published: 2015-06-29
EMC Unisphere for VMAX 8.x before 8.0.3.4 sets up the Java Debugging Wire Protocol (JDWP) service, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-1900
Published: 2015-06-29
IBM InfoSphere DataStage 8.1, 8.5, 8.7, 9.1, and 11.3 through 11.3.1.2 on UNIX allows local users to write to executable files, and consequently obtain root privileges, via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-4768
Published: 2015-06-28
IBM Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) on Flex System x880 X6, System x3850 X6, and System x3950 X6 devices allows remote authenticated users to cause an unspecified temporary denial of service by using privileged access to enable a legacy boot mode.

CVE-2014-6198
Published: 2015-06-28
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Security Network Protection 5.3 before 5.3.1 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Marc Spitler, co-author of the Verizon DBIR will share some of the lesser-known but most intriguing tidbits from the massive report