News
11/5/2008
02:55 PM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
50%
50%

SSDs Are All About Latency

Nearly every storage manufacturer has been articulating a solid state disk (SSD) strategy in the past two quarters. EMC, HP, IBM, HDS, NetApp, and Compellent are all set to add the capability to their offering. Some are doing so today, while others are still in the strategy mapping process.

Nearly every storage manufacturer has been articulating a solid state disk (SSD) strategy in the past two quarters. EMC, HP, IBM, HDS, NetApp, and Compellent are all set to add the capability to their offering. Some are doing so today, while others are still in the strategy mapping process.What most of them agree on is that SSDs can be a game changer, with the potential performance improvements of 30X when compared with mechanical drives. A key issue for them and you to understand is latency.

First, what is latency? Also called response time or wait time, in storage terms it is the amount of time between a request being made and that request being fulfilled. A user example would be the amount of time it takes from you launching your word processor to you being able to start typing.

For most applications, standard mechanical hard drives fulfill these requests fast enough that this response time isn't even noticed, but sticking with the word processing example, what if as you started to type your novel, you had to wait two seconds between the time you press a letter and the time that you could press the next letter? That would get annoying real fast and it would cost you time and probably money. Your important revenue generating application treats response time the same way.

So what makes the latency of various storage systems different? In the past it had all been about the speed of the drives. Everything else in the storage system was able to respond faster than the drives so the focus became making the drives faster by using higher RPM drives, array groups with a high drive count, short-stroking those drives, wide striping those drives and increasing the number of application servers for improved parallelism.

SSDs change that focus, the speed of the drive is no longer the issue. SSDs change the latency focus on the storage system itself and away from the drive. Manufacturers will need to change how these SSD shelves are addressed or create standalone systems like those from Texas Memory Systems, Solid Data Systems, and Violin Memory.

In our next entry we will take a deeper dive into the impact on storage systems as a result of zero latency at the drive level.

Join us for our upcoming webcast: SSD: Flash vs. DRAM...and the winner is?

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-2015-4293
Published: 2015-07-30
The packet-reassembly implementation in Cisco IOS XE 3.13S and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption or packet loss) via fragmented (1) IPv4 or (2) IPv6 packets that trigger ATTN-3-SYNC_TIMEOUT errors after reassembly failures, aka Bug ID CSCuo37957.

CVE-2014-7912
Published: 2015-07-29
The get_option function in dhcp.c in dhcpcd before 6.2.0, as used in dhcpcd 5.x in Android before 5.1 and other products, does not validate the relationship between length fields and the amount of data, which allows remote DHCP servers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory c...

CVE-2014-7913
Published: 2015-07-29
The print_option function in dhcp-common.c in dhcpcd through 6.9.1, as used in dhcp.c in dhcpcd 5.x in Android before 5.1 and other products, misinterprets the return value of the snprintf function, which allows remote DHCP servers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corru...

CVE-2015-2977
Published: 2015-07-29
Webservice-DIC yoyaku_v41 allows remote attackers to create arbitrary files, and consequently execute arbitrary code, via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-2978
Published: 2015-07-29
Webservice-DIC yoyaku_v41 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and complete a conference-room reservation via unspecified vectors, as demonstrated by an "unintentional reservation."

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
What’s the future of the venerable firewall? We’ve invited two security industry leaders to make their case: Join us and bring your questions and opinions!