Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Thank you for all the messages, I read few messages of the solution " falconstore " VTL of storagetek. Do you think that the DSSU will replace the solutions VTL ? Didier Hampus Lind a écrit : >Hi, > >Here in Sweden Diligent is pretty cheap I think, or at least at the same >level as other vendors. But of course management people can twist things the >other way... > >Did you go with another VTL/de-dup solution instead? > >Hampus Lind >Rikspolisstyrelsen >National Police Board >Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 >Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 >E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >-Ursprungligt meddelande- >Från: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Skickat: den 15 september 2006 15:33 >Till: Hampus Lind; Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > >We were looking at an offsite backup solution w/ Diligent here and everyone >we talked to (Local Reseller, Diligent Sales & Technical resources) said our >HDS AMS500 w/ SATA Shelves would be fine. In the end we balked at the >Diligent Protectier software cost and went another way but cost aside this >solution was our best choice. > >-Jonathan > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus Lind >Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:12 AM >To: 'Paul Keating'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > >Hi, > >ProtecTier on work over FC protocol but I have never heard that it require >FC disk... When I meet with diligent people from Israel, I told them that we >already have 7 TB of SATA that we which to "re-use", that would be no >problem, they said. > >They only support FC arrays today, but in that array you can have both FC >and SATA drives. It feels strange creating a backup-to-disk solution that >only support FC disks... > >The guy selling you ProtecTier, does he work at HDS and want you to buy a >solution that includes expensive FC disks?? ;-) > >I think you need to find another source to Diligent, or perhaps I need to >find one that tells me the truth.. :-) > > > > > >Hampus Lind >Rikspolisstyrelsen >National Police Board >Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 >Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 >E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >-----Ursprungligt meddelande- >Från: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Skickat: den 15 september 2006 14:51 >Till: Hampus Lind; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > >I like the look of the ProtecTIER product. > >However, I've come up with some information that I can't get a hard answer >on. >The info I got from Diligent coonfused me even more. > >Everything I can find, and am told by either HDS, or Diligent says that >Protectier requires FC disk...as in, not SATA.. > >I find this confusing.sure the data de-duplication technology requires >knowing where the data is on disk, quickly, etc, etc. So I said to the >Diligent rep I spoke with "Ok, so the de-duplication algorithm actually has >to search the disk to find patterns?" to which I got the response >(paraphrasing)"Oh no, of course not...all of the data on disk is mapped in >RAM, we can map 1PB of disk in 4GB of RAM. The appliance doesn't need to >read the disk to find hash matches, etc. All of that is done in RAM and only >the unique data that needs to be written to disk is written to disk". >So I asked why then would FC disk be necessary??? >After pushing it a bit, I got a response that Yes, it would technically >"work" with SATA disk, however there would be a performance hit due to >SATA's transfer speed, of approx 40%, so they don't support SATA. > >Sohere's my confusionsince the de-duplication is being done "in >stream" on the appliance before the data ever gets to the disk array, then >with the advertised 25:1 ratio, only 4% of the data hitting the box is >getting written to disk. > >Even if the SATA disk is 80% slower that FC (being fascetious here), >shouldn't it still be like 5 times faster than another product that writes >"everything" to SATA disk? Yes all the other VTL vendors are basing their >products on SATA (as Diligent is with their VTF Open >product) > > >Paul > > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Hi, Here in Sweden Diligent is pretty cheap I think, or at least at the same level as other vendors. But of course management people can twist things the other way... Did you go with another VTL/de-dup solution instead? Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 15 september 2006 15:33 Till: Hampus Lind; Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? We were looking at an offsite backup solution w/ Diligent here and everyone we talked to (Local Reseller, Diligent Sales & Technical resources) said our HDS AMS500 w/ SATA Shelves would be fine. In the end we balked at the Diligent Protectier software cost and went another way but cost aside this solution was our best choice. -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus Lind Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:12 AM To: 'Paul Keating'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi, ProtecTier on work over FC protocol but I have never heard that it require FC disk... When I meet with diligent people from Israel, I told them that we already have 7 TB of SATA that we which to "re-use", that would be no problem, they said. They only support FC arrays today, but in that array you can have both FC and SATA drives. It feels strange creating a backup-to-disk solution that only support FC disks... The guy selling you ProtecTier, does he work at HDS and want you to buy a solution that includes expensive FC disks?? ;-) I think you need to find another source to Diligent, or perhaps I need to find one that tells me the truth.. :-) Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 15 september 2006 14:51 Till: Hampus Lind; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? I like the look of the ProtecTIER product. However, I've come up with some information that I can't get a hard answer on. The info I got from Diligent coonfused me even more. Everything I can find, and am told by either HDS, or Diligent says that Protectier requires FC disk...as in, not SATA.. I find this confusing.sure the data de-duplication technology requires knowing where the data is on disk, quickly, etc, etc. So I said to the Diligent rep I spoke with "Ok, so the de-duplication algorithm actually has to search the disk to find patterns?" to which I got the response (paraphrasing)"Oh no, of course not...all of the data on disk is mapped in RAM, we can map 1PB of disk in 4GB of RAM. The appliance doesn't need to read the disk to find hash matches, etc. All of that is done in RAM and only the unique data that needs to be written to disk is written to disk". So I asked why then would FC disk be necessary??? After pushing it a bit, I got a response that Yes, it would technically "work" with SATA disk, however there would be a performance hit due to SATA's transfer speed, of approx 40%, so they don't support SATA. Sohere's my confusionsince the de-duplication is being done "in stream" on the appliance before the data ever gets to the disk array, then with the advertised 25:1 ratio, only 4% of the data hitting the box is getting written to disk. Even if the SATA disk is 80% slower that FC (being fascetious here), shouldn't it still be like 5 times faster than another product that writes "everything" to SATA disk? Yes all the other VTL vendors are basing their products on SATA (as Diligent is with their VTF Open product) Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus > Lind > Sent: September 14, 2006 1:54 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > > However, I have looked at both diligent and falconstor, and for now I > think I would go with diligent.. What do you guys think?? > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
I feel your pain. :o\ Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 15, 2006 9:54 AM > To: Paul Keating; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > and my management successfully picked the least costly solution that > (barely) meets our needs possible! =( > > -J > > La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
/sigh Don't try and figure it out. It took me 5 weeks to meet all of Management's demands, and I'm still confused. =P Basically, IF we went w/ Protectier we would have put it in our "DR Building" (a significant ways away from our Data Center, connected via fiber) and would have only had to write tapes for our monthly DR tapes that get sent out of state. Of course the problem with that is our Hitachi SAN IS IN the Datacenter so the plan involved protectier in the Data Center and replicating the data to the other building. Or possibly using the fiber between the buildings for SAN traffic instead of network. Anyhow, I looked at about 30 or 40 different configs and most of them were great, but too pricey. Our retention policy here is pretty low, we don't keep anything longer than a year except email which amounts to very few tapes. I think in the end the solution we are going with costs about $180,000 and the Prtectier was easily in the $250,000 - $300,000 range. Its looking like a slow Friday.. I'm going to get our "final" config documented and I'll send it out for all to see. But rest assured I got grilled on about every backup solution that you could possibly think of, and my management successfully picked the least costly solution that (barely) meets our needs possible! =( -J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:38 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Interesting. I think you were mentioning a while back, that you only intend to keep data on disk for as long as it takes to get it staged off to tape? In that case, yeah, the cost of ProtectTIER is certainly steep, but if you intend to keep data around on disk for more than a couple weeks, the higher cost of protectTIER certainly pays for itself in the disk you don't have to buy! Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 15, 2006 9:33 AM > > We were looking at an offsite backup solution w/ Diligent here and > everyone we talked to (Local Reseller, Diligent Sales & Technical > resources) said our HDS AMS500 w/ SATA Shelves would be fine. In the > end we balked at the Diligent Protectier software cost and went > another way but cost aside this solution was our best choice. > > -Jonathan ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Interesting. I think you were mentioning a while back, that you only intend to keep data on disk for as long as it takes to get it staged off to tape? In that case, yeah, the cost of ProtectTIER is certainly steep, but if you intend to keep data around on disk for more than a couple weeks, the higher cost of protectTIER certainly pays for itself in the disk you don't have to buy! Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 15, 2006 9:33 AM > > We were looking at an offsite backup solution w/ Diligent > here and everyone we talked to (Local Reseller, Diligent > Sales & Technical resources) said our HDS AMS500 w/ SATA > Shelves would be fine. In the end we balked at the Diligent > Protectier software cost and went another way but cost aside > this solution was our best choice. > > -Jonathan La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
We were looking at an offsite backup solution w/ Diligent here and everyone we talked to (Local Reseller, Diligent Sales & Technical resources) said our HDS AMS500 w/ SATA Shelves would be fine. In the end we balked at the Diligent Protectier software cost and went another way but cost aside this solution was our best choice. -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus Lind Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:12 AM To: 'Paul Keating'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi, ProtecTier on work over FC protocol but I have never heard that it require FC disk... When I meet with diligent people from Israel, I told them that we already have 7 TB of SATA that we which to "re-use", that would be no problem, they said. They only support FC arrays today, but in that array you can have both FC and SATA drives. It feels strange creating a backup-to-disk solution that only support FC disks... The guy selling you ProtecTier, does he work at HDS and want you to buy a solution that includes expensive FC disks?? ;-) I think you need to find another source to Diligent, or perhaps I need to find one that tells me the truth.. :-) Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 15 september 2006 14:51 Till: Hampus Lind; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? I like the look of the ProtecTIER product. However, I've come up with some information that I can't get a hard answer on. The info I got from Diligent coonfused me even more. Everything I can find, and am told by either HDS, or Diligent says that Protectier requires FC disk...as in, not SATA.. I find this confusing.sure the data de-duplication technology requires knowing where the data is on disk, quickly, etc, etc. So I said to the Diligent rep I spoke with "Ok, so the de-duplication algorithm actually has to search the disk to find patterns?" to which I got the response (paraphrasing)"Oh no, of course not...all of the data on disk is mapped in RAM, we can map 1PB of disk in 4GB of RAM. The appliance doesn't need to read the disk to find hash matches, etc. All of that is done in RAM and only the unique data that needs to be written to disk is written to disk". So I asked why then would FC disk be necessary??? After pushing it a bit, I got a response that Yes, it would technically "work" with SATA disk, however there would be a performance hit due to SATA's transfer speed, of approx 40%, so they don't support SATA. Sohere's my confusionsince the de-duplication is being done "in stream" on the appliance before the data ever gets to the disk array, then with the advertised 25:1 ratio, only 4% of the data hitting the box is getting written to disk. Even if the SATA disk is 80% slower that FC (being fascetious here), shouldn't it still be like 5 times faster than another product that writes "everything" to SATA disk? Yes all the other VTL vendors are basing their products on SATA (as Diligent is with their VTF Open product) Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus > Lind > Sent: September 14, 2006 1:54 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > > However, I have looked at both diligent and falconstor, and for now I > think I would go with diligent.. What do you guys think?? > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
My info has come from three sources: A) a question posed to the "contact us" link at diligent.com B) the Diligent regional Rep for Canada C) the rep from HDS. The Rep from HDS agrees with me, that it doesn't make sense. FC connectivity is sorta obvious... Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: Hampus Lind [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 15, 2006 9:12 AM > To: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: SV: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > > Hi, > > ProtecTier on work over FC protocol but I have never heard > that it require > FC disk... When I meet with diligent people from Israel, I > told them that we > already have 7 TB of SATA that we which to "re-use", that would be no > problem, they said. > > They only support FC arrays today, but in that array you can > have both FC > and SATA drives. It feels strange creating a backup-to-disk > solution that > only support FC disks... > > The guy selling you ProtecTier, does he work at HDS and want > you to buy a > solution that includes expensive FC disks?? ;-) > > I think you need to find another source to Diligent, or > perhaps I need to > find one that tells me the truth.. :-) > La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Hi, ProtecTier on work over FC protocol but I have never heard that it require FC disk... When I meet with diligent people from Israel, I told them that we already have 7 TB of SATA that we which to "re-use", that would be no problem, they said. They only support FC arrays today, but in that array you can have both FC and SATA drives. It feels strange creating a backup-to-disk solution that only support FC disks... The guy selling you ProtecTier, does he work at HDS and want you to buy a solution that includes expensive FC disks?? ;-) I think you need to find another source to Diligent, or perhaps I need to find one that tells me the truth.. :-) Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 15 september 2006 14:51 Till: Hampus Lind; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? I like the look of the ProtecTIER product. However, I've come up with some information that I can't get a hard answer on. The info I got from Diligent coonfused me even more. Everything I can find, and am told by either HDS, or Diligent says that Protectier requires FC disk...as in, not SATA.. I find this confusing.sure the data de-duplication technology requires knowing where the data is on disk, quickly, etc, etc. So I said to the Diligent rep I spoke with "Ok, so the de-duplication algorithm actually has to search the disk to find patterns?" to which I got the response (paraphrasing)"Oh no, of course not...all of the data on disk is mapped in RAM, we can map 1PB of disk in 4GB of RAM. The appliance doesn't need to read the disk to find hash matches, etc. All of that is done in RAM and only the unique data that needs to be written to disk is written to disk". So I asked why then would FC disk be necessary??? After pushing it a bit, I got a response that Yes, it would technically "work" with SATA disk, however there would be a performance hit due to SATA's transfer speed, of approx 40%, so they don't support SATA. Sohere's my confusionsince the de-duplication is being done "in stream" on the appliance before the data ever gets to the disk array, then with the advertised 25:1 ratio, only 4% of the data hitting the box is getting written to disk. Even if the SATA disk is 80% slower that FC (being fascetious here), shouldn't it still be like 5 times faster than another product that writes "everything" to SATA disk? Yes all the other VTL vendors are basing their products on SATA (as Diligent is with their VTF Open product) Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Hampus Lind > Sent: September 14, 2006 1:54 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > > However, I have looked at both diligent and falconstor, and > for now I think > I would go with diligent.. What do you guys think?? > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
I like the look of the ProtecTIER product. However, I've come up with some information that I can't get a hard answer on. The info I got from Diligent coonfused me even more. Everything I can find, and am told by either HDS, or Diligent says that Protectier requires FC disk...as in, not SATA.. I find this confusing.sure the data de-duplication technology requires knowing where the data is on disk, quickly, etc, etc. So I said to the Diligent rep I spoke with "Ok, so the de-duplication algorithm actually has to search the disk to find patterns?" to which I got the response (paraphrasing)"Oh no, of course not...all of the data on disk is mapped in RAM, we can map 1PB of disk in 4GB of RAM. The appliance doesn't need to read the disk to find hash matches, etc. All of that is done in RAM and only the unique data that needs to be written to disk is written to disk". So I asked why then would FC disk be necessary??? After pushing it a bit, I got a response that Yes, it would technically "work" with SATA disk, however there would be a performance hit due to SATA's transfer speed, of approx 40%, so they don't support SATA. Sohere's my confusionsince the de-duplication is being done "in stream" on the appliance before the data ever gets to the disk array, then with the advertised 25:1 ratio, only 4% of the data hitting the box is getting written to disk. Even if the SATA disk is 80% slower that FC (being fascetious here), shouldn't it still be like 5 times faster than another product that writes "everything" to SATA disk? Yes all the other VTL vendors are basing their products on SATA (as Diligent is with their VTF Open product) Paul -- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Hampus Lind > Sent: September 14, 2006 1:54 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? > > > However, I have looked at both diligent and falconstor, and > for now I think > I would go with diligent.. What do you guys think?? > La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Hehe... Cool article.. But I don't know how much of it thats true... I am talking to both SUN and HDS for the moment and none of them has mentioned this. I will ask them about it. I have also heard that VSM open will be killed and that SUN will go with Falconstor instead. But regarding to my sells guy at SUN, they sells people havent got the word that they will kill VSM open, so they speculate in that it will come later on instead. I dont know what to believe for now.. I know Diligent is on the market, while falconstor and VSM open arent. So if you want de-dup function today, you have to look at diligent or perhaps data domain, but thats a different story. However, I have looked at both diligent and falconstor, and for now I think I would go with diligent.. What do you guys think?? Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 14 september 2006 19:18 Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kopia: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: RE: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? I saw this article back in July and would be interested in your comments ... Are they still a player? Have they re-defined a direction? http://www.techworld.com/storage/blogs/index.cfm?blogid=3&entryid=216 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus Lind Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:59 AM To: 'Didier BRUN' Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi, I am interested in the answers you get. We are looking on stk/falconstor with there SIR function, and comparing them with diligent ProtecTier.. Please let me know what you find out. Thanks and regards, Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Didier BRUN Skickat: den 14 september 2006 16:36 Till: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi all, Did anybody meet problems with the VTL solution of StorageTek ( falcon solution ;> ) ? Thanks Didier ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information of Northwestern Mutual. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify Northwestern Mutual immediately by returning it to the sender and delete all copies from your system. Please be advised that communications received via the Northwestern Mutual Secure Message Center are secure. Communications that are not received via the Northwestern Mutual Secure Message Center may not be secure and could be observed by a third party. Thank you for your cooperation. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
I saw this article back in July and would be interested in your comments ... Are they still a player? Have they re-defined a direction? http://www.techworld.com/storage/blogs/index.cfm?blogid=3&entryid=216 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hampus Lind Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:59 AM To: 'Didier BRUN' Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi, I am interested in the answers you get. We are looking on stk/falconstor with there SIR function, and comparing them with diligent ProtecTier.. Please let me know what you find out. Thanks and regards, Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Didier BRUN Skickat: den 14 september 2006 16:36 Till: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi all, Did anybody meet problems with the VTL solution of StorageTek ( falcon solution ;> ) ? Thanks Didier ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information of Northwestern Mutual. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify Northwestern Mutual immediately by returning it to the sender and delete all copies from your system. Please be advised that communications received via the Northwestern Mutual Secure Message Center are secure. Communications that are not received via the Northwestern Mutual Secure Message Center may not be secure and could be observed by a third party. Thank you for your cooperation. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Hi, I am interested in the answers you get. We are looking on stk/falconstor with there SIR function, and comparing them with diligent ProtecTier.. Please let me know what you find out. Thanks and regards, Hampus Lind Rikspolisstyrelsen National Police Board Tel dir: +46 (0)8 - 401 99 43 Tel mob: +46 (0)70 - 217 92 66 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Didier BRUN Skickat: den 14 september 2006 16:36 Till: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Ämne: [Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ? Hi all, Did anybody meet problems with the VTL solution of StorageTek ( falcon solution ;> ) ? Thanks Didier ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] problems with VTL StorageTek solution ?
Hi all, Did anybody meet problems with the VTL solution of StorageTek ( falcon solution ;> ) ? Thanks Didier ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
