• The Four Hundred
  • Subscribe
  • Media Kit
  • Contributors
  • About Us
  • Contact
Menu
  • The Four Hundred
  • Subscribe
  • Media Kit
  • Contributors
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Tape Backup: Obviously, a Whole Lot Greener than Disk Backup

    June 2, 2008 Timothy Prickett Morgan

    Some technologies are very hard to kill. Long before there was disk, there was tape, and the ridiculously cheap disk capacity that is available has allowed many companies to do their archiving on disk-based archiving systems that look like tape to servers even if they are not. But using disk-based archiving comes at a very high operational cost. Disks need to spin to be useful, but once a tape has data archived on it, it pretty much stops using power until it is specifically required to get a bit of data for an application or to archive another data set.

    The death of tape has been predicted many times in the past, probably as much as the mainframe that it was initially married to. But tape still has its uses, and if history is any guide, will continue to. The Ultrium consortium, the group of tape drive and array makers that is backing the high-density Linear Tape Out (LTO) tape technology that pretty much owns the data center these days, is touting a new report put out by The Clipper Group that compares the cost of disk-based archiving versus tape archiving, including not only the cost of the media itself but also the energy costs associated with using it. (You can read that report here for yourself at the Ultrium consortium site.)

    The bottom line, according to analysts David Reine and Mike Kahn, is that the cost of long-term storage for an array of SATA disks is 24 times as high compared to LTO-4 tape arrays, and the energy costs for the disk backup is 290 times higher. You might think that with disk drives getting fatter and arrays getting less expensive, that a disk-to-disk (D2D) backup setup would be more appealing that a tape library. “We began this study to see if the decreasing costs of disk subsystems and the increasing capacity of disk drives, especially second-tier SATA storage, might have made the TCO for disk more attractive versus tape in the long-term storage of data,” the two analysts explained in the report. “It did not. We thought that the cost of energy would be a noticeable factor in favor of tape. And it is.”

    Clipper Group took an initial data set of 50 TB and assumed that the capacity requirements for the midrange shop being simulated would grow by 50 percent per year. The data center did daily incremental backups to disk and tape, retaining these on disk for a quarter and then moved out to disk array archives or a tape library. The cost comparison that Clipper Group did only examined the cost of these archives, not including the initial disk arrays, over a five-year term. While electricity in major metro centers is now in the range of 20 cents per kilowatt-hour, Clipper Group chose 12 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is closer to the prevailing cost in rural areas for corporations. (But certainly not the residential rate we pay in our homes, which is higher.) To simplify things, the cost of electricity was held constant over the five years, but it seems unlikely that this will happen out here in reality.

    The price differences between the two solutions–D2D or tape library–are jaw dropping. The five-year cost for the D2D approach is $51.7 million, with $49.9 million of that coming from the hardware and software, $1.2 million coming from electricity costs, and just under $600,000 coming from space costs. (Machines have to pay rent, too.) The tape library to do the same backups costs $1.79 million, with only $344,250 coming from space costs and a ridiculously small $3,416 in energy costs over five years.

    What disk-based archiving solution providers have figured out, and what disk array makers are thinking about too, is to design a disk array that can quiesce disk arms and platters within the array when they are not needed. Of course, with random access to data, this is something of a challenge, and probably not the right engineering solution.

    That is why I suspect that flash memory arrays will be making waves as a third option for nearline archiving as soon as reasonably fat flash memory chips are available. Last week, for instance, Intel announced a 32 gigabit NAND flash memory chip that uses the company’s most advanced 34 nanometer chip making processes. These chips, as well as similar 32 gigabit flash chips from Toshiba and Samsung, are going to allow disk makers to offer solid state storage disks in a 1.8-inch form factor with a 256 GB capacity. Let that sink in for a while.

    And now consider that flash uses a lot less power, is more reliable than disks thanks to the lack of moving parts, and has anywhere from one to two orders of magnitude higher I/O operations per second (IOPs) compared to regular disk drives. So on I/O bound workloads–like transaction processing–a mix of relatively expensive flash drives backed up by tape for archiving could be very energy efficient and cost-effective compared to a disk array setup with disk-based archiving. Flash provides the performance and tape provides the price/performance. Flash-based disk drives have to go volume and the price has to come down before this can happen, but with the world moving to laptops, the transition away from disks to flash drives could happen pretty quickly, bringing the costs way down as the volumes go way up.

    RELATED STORIES

    IT Shops Consume 2 Million LTO Tape Drives

    IBM Introduces Half-Height LTO 3 Tape Drive

    IBM Rolls Out LTO 4 Tape Drives and Libraries

    Asigra Debuts Remote, Agent-Less Backup for iSeries

    HP Buys Clustering Software Maker, Launches D2D Backup Solution

    LTO Tape Drives a Smashing Success

    Idealstor Adds CDP to Backup Repertoire That Includes ‘Ejectable’ Disks

    Unitrends Adds OS/400 Support to D2D Backup Appliances



                         Post this story to del.icio.us
                   Post this story to Digg
        Post this story to Slashdot

    Share this:

    • Reddit
    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Email

    Tags: Tags: mtfh_rc, Volume 17, Number 22 -- June 2, 2008

    Sponsored by
    Raz-Lee Security

    iSecurity Multi Factor Authentication (MFA) helps organizations meet compliance standards and improve the existing security environment on IBM i. It requires a user to verify his identity with two or more credentials.

    Key Features:

    • iSecurity provides Multi Factor Authentication as part of the user’s initial program
    • Works with every Authenticator App available in the Market.

    Contact us at https://www.razlee.com/isecurity-multi-factor-authentication/

    Share this:

    • Reddit
    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Email

    The IT Services Business Keeps On A-Growing Data Quality Tool from AMB Now Supports i and z/OS Platforms

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

TFH Volume: 17 Issue: 22

This Issue Sponsored By

    Table of Contents

    • More Power Transitions Are on the Way
    • U.S. Drags Down Server Sales in Q1, But Weak Dollar Helps
    • Server Branding 101: Big Name, Big Game?
    • Java Compute Appliances Upgraded by Azul Systems
    • Survival of the Fittest: Ensuring IT Is Providing You with an Innovative Edge
    • Mainline Buys Systems Integrator CompServ
    • Interesting Mods and Add-Ons for Office Blade Servers
    • Tape Backup: Obviously, a Whole Lot Greener than Disk Backup
    • IBS Issues New Shares to Raise Capital, Reorganizes Operations
    • It’s Training and Education Time: OCEAN Conference Set for June 30

    Content archive

    • The Four Hundred
    • Four Hundred Stuff
    • Four Hundred Guru

    Recent Posts

    • IBM i Has a Future ‘If Kept Up To Date,’ IDC Says
    • When You Need Us, We Are Ready To Do Grunt Work
    • Generative AI: Coming to an ERP Near You
    • Four Hundred Monitor, March 22
    • IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 25, Number 12
    • Unattended IBM i Operations Continue Upward Climb
    • VS Code Is The Full Stack IDE For IBM i
    • Domino Runs on IBM i 7.5, But HCL Still Working on Power10
    • Four Hundred Monitor, March 6
    • IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 25, Number 11

    Subscribe

    To get news from IT Jungle sent to your inbox every week, subscribe to our newsletter.

    Pages

    • About Us
    • Contact
    • Contributors
    • Four Hundred Monitor
    • IBM i PTF Guide
    • Media Kit
    • Subscribe

    Search

    Copyright © 2023 IT Jungle