Web 2.0, its not just AJAX, let the storage folks have some fun too
Wednesday Jun 14, 2006
Storage systems are rarely mentioned in the same sentence (and most
often not even in the same conversation) as Web 2.0. There could
be quite a few reasons but, in the end, it seems like systems folks
take storage for granted and storage folks take systems for
granted. On the other hand, storage could be perceived as just
plain boring.
Still, one (I) could easily make an argument that storage is the single
most important aspect of Web 2.0. Let's go back to the Wikipedia definition for a moment, "The term Web 2.0 refers to a second generation of services available on the World Wide Web that lets people collaborate and share information online."
Now, I have to tell you, all of that information flying around the web is getting stored somewhere. Storage sales continue to fly, and if you pay attention, Oracle
isn't doing too bad either. Where does all of that information
and content go when folks aren't accessing it? Its at rest on a
platter, in flash memory, on a tape...its somewhere, just waiting to be
accessed.
An obvious Web 2.0 need is efficient Information Lifecycle Management
(ILM). Think about something as simple as Instant
Messaging. Instant Messaging is about "now", I
communicate...well...instantly. Rarely do I go back to recall
what I talked about, but on occasion, I go surfing through my old IMs
to get URLs, recall important details, and more. There is NO
REASON that all of my IM conversations should be on high priced storage
with immediate access yet, still, I would like timely access to my old
IMs. This is tiered storage, and Sun has a good story
around this. Further, with all of the government regulations in
the industry about retaining information, the StorageTek acquisition
looks very solid. I used to work at Imation in Minnesota.
The execs were enamored with tape and diskettes, I was a young kid with
software infrastructure on his mind and was largely dismissive of this
tape thing. I have to tell you, I look back at those execs with
some amount of respect, tape is fundamentally important, especially in
Web 2.0 if you couple it with a sound ILM strategy. Look at the
history of the Imation stock and where it goes after a major
disaster. Companies look at their disaster recovery plans and
they basically say "I gotta get me some of that tape".
Ok, ILM, good, major player in Web 2.0, Sun, we have it covered.
A bit boring, but boring is important. Quicken is boring too, as
in, accountant boring, but just try to pry quicken from my fingers at
tax time...
What about this grid thing that Sun is all over? CPU grids are fun and exciting, but the relationship to storage is largely done with existing technologies (shared filesystems,
SAN, and data movers). Storage attachment to grid is often done
by building one big fabric, maybe one big zone, and heavy use of LUN
mapping/masking. SMI-S
can play a great role here. Provisioning, changing access rights,
carving capacity, shouldn't be different for every array, there is no
differentiation here. Information access and retrieval in a Web
2.0 world is the lifeline of a company. Differentiate on quality
of service, reliability, performance and other attributes that matter
in a Web 2.0 world, then use a standard API so your storage can be
plugged into grid management and system's management tools so your
application's storage can follow the application and the demands that
the grid understands.
Hmm, again, Sun's all over this area. Shared filesystems, ZFS, SMI-S, all good. Still pretty boring though.
What's interesting about all of the above is that storage is slaved in
its traditional way to systems. Filesystem access, block storage
coupling, LUNs, SCSI targets, NFS, CIFS, and so on. Web 2.0,
though, is about semantically rich content, pictures, conversations,
combining satellite maps with GPS signals (hmmm, what about Google maps
and sounds so I could "hear" the location I'm looking at...that's
creepy), micro payments, extending the Internet from a browser and into
the very fabric of our existence...listening to a podcast on the
Internet with my phone while I wait for a call from my boss...having my
address book with me at all times no matter what device I have with me
or where I am, or who's tablet I'm teaming on at Starbucks.
Doesn't it seem like a filesystem and blocks don't quite do this
information rich world justice?
Rather than talking about CPUs and assuming you have to fit your data
into a filesystem or database. Why not bring storage and
applications closer together and make all of those CPUs and blocks go
away...virtualization you know? Instead of creating a file format
that contains metadata about a picture and tracks collaborations, then
points to another file with a jpeg and an index that associates the
two, why not build ONE storage API that you can extend with as much
metadata as you want and you can retrieve the picture directly based on
a query of metadata without having to traverse fragile networks of
files or database tables? Standardize that API...instead of
serving filesystems, serve objects for a change.
Now that would make storage exciting. Then, don't tie it to my
server. Make it a remote API so as my grid adds CPU and my Web
2.0-AJAX-Whizz-bang-Collaborative-Photo-and-Movie sharing site attracts
eyes, I don't have to do any crazy driver deployments and
maintenance...I hate drivers...maybe just use a powerful, Java-based
API that deploys to any platform...yeah, that would be the ticket.
Web 2.0 and storage. If you think about it, it might be more fun
than the servers if you just concentrate on it. And please...stop
with the AJAX, you just remind me of how dirty my house is...there is
more to Web 2.0 than the AJAX...though, admittedly, AJAX is cool stuff...
|
|
|
|
