Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

News

5/26/2010
08:53 AM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
50%
50%

Tape and Disk Better Together

I have seen a few surveys recently that tape penetration in data centers remains very high, less than 15% of data centers have become tapeless, of course that means that 85% of environments still have tape. In my conversations with IT managers most are planning to keep it. Most see the role of disk in the backup process to augment or at best compliment tape. What's needed then is a way to make tape and disk better together.

I have seen a few surveys recently that tape penetration in data centers remains very high, less than 15% of data centers have become tapeless, of course that means that 85% of environments still have tape. In my conversations with IT managers most are planning to keep it. Most see the role of disk in the backup process to augment or at best compliment tape. What's needed then is a way to make tape and disk better together.With each generation tape just gets faster. The challenge is, as you probably know all too well, is that if you can't keep a tape saturated with data, the time it takes to slow the drive down, wait for data and then speed back up can extract a serious performance penalty. Disk is more forgiving. Disks' challenge, although improved with technologies like deduplication and compression, is it is still more expensive than tape. With LTO-5 tape is now about $50 per TB. The most competitive disk systems, even with full deduplication and compression, are typically around $1 to $2 per GB or $1,000 per TB.

The disk price erosion, helped by technology, has certainly made disk a viable short term backup destination and especially because of technology, has make it an option to consider for medium term (~ 7 years) archive. Disk is more forgiving of variable backup performance than tape is, plus it has the perceived advantage of better accessibility because of its file system like nature. Although as we discuss in our article "What is LTFS?" we think that tape as a file system may remove that advantage.

Given these realities can tape and disk be better together? Disk can be simply used as a front end cache to tape. By queuing up large sections of backup on disk first, tape can then be streamed at full speed. This keeps the disk capacity investment down and tape speed up. If handling most recoveries from disk is a goal the cache can be sized up a bit, but typically this is when backup managers will look to a disk system designed specifically at being a backup target, which will also mean adding capabilities like scalability, deduplication and/or compression. The challenge with many of these devices is their integration with tape or lack there of.

Ideally what is needed is an abstraction layer that makes the backup target separate from the software. In some cases the backup software itself can provide the abstraction layer meshing the different backup targets into a single managed infrastructure. Of course that this means selecting only one backup application for the enterprise. For most data centers having only one backup solution sounds nice but is not sustainable, there are almost always a collection of "one-off" data protection processes. Alternatively the abstraction can be done by an appliance allowing multiple backup applications to virtually see whatever device they prefer yet have the appliance manage all the actual back end devices. This would allow a selection of backup targets based on need instead of by application support.

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

Subscribe to our RSS feed.

George Crump is lead analyst of Storage Switzerland, an IT analyst firm focused on the storage and virtualization segments. Find Storage Switzerland's disclosure statement here.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
Breaches Are Inevitable, So Embrace the Chaos
Ariel Zeitlin, Chief Technology Officer & Co-Founder, Guardicore,  11/13/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-19010
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-16
Eval injection in the Math plugin of Limnoria (before 2019.11.09) and Supybot (through 2018-05-09) allows remote unprivileged attackers to disclose information or possibly have unspecified other impact via the calc and icalc IRC commands.
CVE-2019-16761
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
A specially crafted Bitcoin script can cause a discrepancy between the specified SLP consensus rules and the validation result of the [email protected] npm package. An attacker could create a specially crafted Bitcoin script in order to cause a hard-fork from the SLP consensus. All versions >1.0...
CVE-2019-16762
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
A specially crafted Bitcoin script can cause a discrepancy between the specified SLP consensus rules and the validation result of the slpjs npm package. An attacker could create a specially crafted Bitcoin script in order to cause a hard-fork from the SLP consensus. Affected users can upgrade to any...
CVE-2019-13581
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
An issue was discovered in Marvell 88W8688 Wi-Fi firmware before version p52, as used on Tesla Model S/X vehicles manufactured before March 2018, via the Parrot Faurecia Automotive FC6050W module. A heap-based buffer overflow allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary ...
CVE-2019-13582
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
An issue was discovered in Marvell 88W8688 Wi-Fi firmware before version p52, as used on Tesla Model S/X vehicles manufactured before March 2018, via the Parrot Faurecia Automotive FC6050W module. A stack overflow could lead to denial of service or arbitrary code execution.