It was with interest that I watched the launch of EMC’s VNX refresh. The updated boxes got some long-awaited features, EMC talked a lot about how some pretty severe single-threaded bottlenecks were removed, more CPU and memory was put in, and there was much rejoicing.
Not really trying to pick on the new boxes (that will be in a future post, relax ), but what I thought was interesting was that the code that makes most of the new features a possibility cannot be loaded on current-gen VNX boxes (not even the biggest, the 7500, which has plenty of CPU and RAM juice even compared to the next gen boxes).
Software-defined storage indeed.
The existing VNX disk shelves also seemingly can’t be re-used at the moment (correct me if I’m wrong please).
This forced obsolescence has been a theme with EMC: Clariion -> VNX -> VNX2 are all complete forklift upgrades. When the original VNX was released, it was utterly incompatible with the CX (Clariion) shelves (SAS replaced FC connectivity). Despite using the exact same code (FLARE).
Other vendors are guilty of this too – a new controller is released, and all prior investments on disk shelves are rendered useless (HDS did this with several iterations of AMS, maybe even with AMS -> HUS, HP with EVA…)
I understand that as technology progresses we sometimes have to abandon the old to make room for the new but, at the same time, customers make significant investments in N-1 technology – and often want to be able to re-use some of their investment with N (and sometimes N+1).
I just had this conversation with a customer, and he said “well, I throw away my gear every 3 years, why should I care?”
Let’s try a thought experiment.
Imagine you just bought a system that’s running the fastest controllers a company sells today, and you got 1PB of storage behind it.
Now, imagine that a mere month after you purchased your controllers, new ones are released that are significantly faster. OK, that stuff happens.
Your gear is not 3 years old yet. It’s 1 month old. It’s running OK.
Now, imagine that your array runs out of steam 6 months later due to unprecedented performance growth. Your system is now 7 months old. You can’t just throw it away and start fresh.
You could buy a new storage system and migrate some of the data to share the load. However, you don’t need more space – you just ran out of controller headroom. Indeed, you still have tons of free space.
But what if you could replace the controllers with the new, beefier ones? And maintain your investment in the 1PB of storage, cache etc? Wouldn’t that be nice?
Or at least be able to move some of the storage pools you may have to the new family of controllers? Even if you had to reformat the disk?
Well – most vendors will tell you “sorry, no, you need to migrate your data to the new box”.
Let’s try another thought experiment.
You bought a storage system a year ago. It performs fine, but it lacks true deduplication capabilities. You have determined it would save you a lot of storage space (= money) if your array had deduplication.
The vendor you purchased the system from announces the refreshed storage OS that finally includes deduplication. And that same vendor made a truly gigantic fuss about software-defined storage, which made everyone feel software would be the big enabler and that coolness was a mere firmware upgrade away.
However, you are eventually told they will not allow the code that enables deduplication to be loaded to your array, and, instead, they ask you to migrate to the refreshed array that supports deduplication. Since the updated code somehow only runs on the new box. Something to do with unicorn milk.
But your array has plenty of CPU headroom to handle deduplication… and you could reformat the disks given some swing storage shelves if the underlying disk format is the issue. But the option is not provided.
How NetApp does things instead
At NetApp we sort of take it for granted so we don’t make a big fuss about software-defined storage, but hardware was always considered an enabler for the software and not the other way around.
For instance: deduplication was released as a free software upgrade for Data ONTAP (the OS for our main line of storage). Back in 2007. For all storage protocols.
In general, we try to let systems be able to load at a minimum N+1 software releases, but most of the time we utterly spoil customers and go far above and beyond, unless we’re talking about the smallest boxes, which naturally have less headroom.
For example, the now aging FAS 3070 I have in the local lab (the bigger of the older midrange boxes, released in 2006) supports anything from ONTAP 7.2.1 (what it was released with) to ONTAP 8.1.3 (released in mid-2013).
This spans multiple major ONTAP releases – huge changes in the code have happened during those releases: 7.3, 8.0, 8.1… Multiple newer arrays were also released as replacements for the 3070: 3170, 3270, 3250.
Yet the 3070 soldiers on with a fully supported, modern OS, 7 years later.
What arrays did our competitors have back then? What is the most modern OS those same arrays can run today? What is that OS missing vs the OS that competitor’s more modern arrays have?
Let’s talk disk shelves.
We used FC loop connectivity for the older shelves (DS14). We then switched to fancy multi-channel SAS and totally different shelves and disks, but never stopped supporting the older shelf technology, even with newer controllers.
That’s the big one. I have customers with DS14 shelves that they purchased for a 3070 that they now have on a 3270 running 8.2. It all works, all supported. Other vendors cut support off after the transition from FC to SAS.
Will we support those older shelves forever? No, that’s impossible, but at least we give our customers a lot of leeway and let them stretch their hardware investments significantly longer than any other major storage vendor I can think of.
Think long term
I encourage customers to always think long term. Try to stop thinking in 3-year increments. Start thinking of other ways you can stretch your investment, other ways to deploy older gear while still keeping it interoperable with newer hardware.
And start thinking about what will happen to your investment once newer gear is released.