News
5/14/2009
08:50 AM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
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
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
DevOps’ Impact on Application Security
DevOps’ Impact on Application Security
Managing the interdependency between software and infrastructure is a thorny challenge. Often, it’s a “developers are from Mars, systems engineers are from Venus” situation.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-6651
Published: 2014-07-31
Multiple directory traversal vulnerabilities in the Vitamin plugin before 1.1.0 for WordPress allow remote attackers to access arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the path parameter to (1) add_headers.php or (2) minify.php.

CVE-2014-2970
Published: 2014-07-31
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2014-5139. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2014-5139, and has also been used to refer to an unrelated topic that is currently outside the scope of CVE. This unrelated topic is a LibreSSL code change adding functionality ...

CVE-2014-3488
Published: 2014-07-31
The SslHandler in Netty before 3.9.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop and CPU consumption) via a crafted SSLv2Hello message.

CVE-2014-3554
Published: 2014-07-31
Buffer overflow in the ndp_msg_opt_dnssl_domain function in libndp allows remote routers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted DNS Search List (DNSSL) in an IPv6 router advertisement.

CVE-2014-5171
Published: 2014-07-31
SAP HANA Extend Application Services (XS) does not encrypt transmissions for applications that enable form based authentication using SSL, which allows remote attackers to obtain credentials and other sensitive information by sniffing the network.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio