« EMC Counters NetApp Offer | Main | Why Would You Want To Be An EMC Employee? »

June 03, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

NK

Scott,

Generally I agree with much of your post. There is definitely a play for source and target de-duplication in this arena. No arguments there at all. I can appreciate that EMC is attempting to corner the market in this fashion. If you have the cash, then why not do that.

What I and perhaps several others are confused about is why acquire a Target-based DeDuplication company - Data Domain, when you already have that same technology through your relationship with Quantum.

Either Quantum just isn't buttering your bread on both sides (which I believe is true) and/or you simply feel that a couple of billion dollars is a small price to pay to keep this technology out of the hands of your competitors. In other words, buy it before someone else does.(I think this is also true).

You probably can't comment on that, which is fair enough. On the bright side, with your recent pay cuts at EMC you can probably afford anything. I say that tongue in cheek as I've had my pay cut already.

What I am surprised about to some extent is that I think your current offering (DL3D) currently lacks scale (148TB max capacity/ingest 1.5TBhr on a good day).. and so does Data Domain (you've pretty much said so yourself in earlier posts).. if you compare that to say Diligent (1PB max / ingest of 3.5TBhr) your stuff is really small fry. So, essentially you are purchasing a company with another box that doesn't scale that well. What I will say though is that the Data Domain box does work as advertised and from the customers I've talked to, appears pretty stable... and that's a good thing. I wouldn't be surprised that if this acquistion does go through that Quantum will just gradually fade into the distance.

Oh and no, I don't work for NetApp or Data Domain for that matter..or IBM. I'm JAFO ;-)

Scott Waterhouse

Well, not too much I can comment on there. :)

About the only thing I will point out is that the DL4000 line with deduplication will scale to 972 TB (296 of which is in the dedup pool) and 8 TB/hr. Nevertheless the Diligent system scales well--I believe the weakness of their approach is that they require fast (FC) disk, and they can't replicate. They are offering XiV as an alternative to FC, but that has real issues (in my opinion) due to the susceptibility to double disk failure.

Sergei

It may be a good thing that EMC is expanding its portfolio, however it confuses the customer even more with so many redundant solutions - and none of them are complete. I like Avamar, however I do not want to sit and sort through data trying to determine what will be deduplicated well and what will not - I want to use a single solution for the entire organization instead of having to purchase Avamar, Networker, and a DL3D solution and then spend days integrating the three, plus worrying about doubling on investment for all three for replication purposes.

Scott Waterhouse

I hear you loud and clear Sergei. Honest I do. And there is nothing I would like more than to be able to deliver that single solution. Nothing. But it doesn't exist.

So, at the moment, you have two choices: 1) pick best of breed point solutions (which you described in your 3 solutions scenario); 2) pick one solution, which inevitably will entail compromises in some use cases.

I think that is a completely valid generalization for all vendor solutions at the moment. Where EMC differs is that we can offer you all those point solutions (no other vendor can) and that there is some integration between them (Avamar can be integrated into NetWorker, should you choose to do so.)

As a quick aside: Avamar will work (or not) largely on the basis of size and use case--it is very quick and easy to determine what to use it for.

Maurizio

"as long as the primary barriers to fixing backup are NOT technological, customers will require data deduplication at multiple places"
I can't agree more : the problem is so deep that we'd need to change the job description of the Backup Manager to a new one, if the Backup Manager would argue about too many choices on his well defined / window closed / do not touch it environment the new comer, the Restore Manager will definitely understand why more choices (and concurrent ones, maybe) is better.
Ah, I've almost forgot..Tape Does Suck, check here (a quiz for the sentimentalists, what's that ? Right Model please)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37880054@N03/3598339508/
Ciao
M

hughman

"I want to use a single solution for the entire organization instead of having to purchase Avamar, Networker, and a DL3D solution and then spend days integrating the three"

with the emc portfolio you can use networker for traditional backup, with avamar as a source de-dupe node and edl as a target de-dupe node. cdp is also integrated with recoverpoint cdp.

so you can have traditional backup, source de-dupe, target de-dupe and cdp all managed via a single product.

pretty easy to deploy...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search The Backup Blog

  • Search

    WWW
    thebackupblog