Learn how to make a more informed decision about what vendor solutions you use for storage
The fifth question leads us into dangerous territory. We think of storage as a basic service. Our users, however, see storage as both a given right and a limitation on their activities. Each process that uses the storage system wants as much storage as it can get with as little possible interference on our part. Take, for example, ERP development: I know of shops where they manage four separate instances of the live data in order to ensure quality control, each instance absorbing roughly 500GB of storage space. Could they get away with less? Possibly. Could they reduce the number of instances now that the development team has become used to it? Unlikely, unless they developed more political clout and the ability to override the people with organisational responsibility for the company's data transactions.
The more complicated the answer to the fifth question becomes, the more we, as infrastructure managers, start to look at service providers over solutions providers. Service providers may cost considerably more but the reduced (for us) maintenance times and more sophisticated software tools mean we remove a source of contention in the environment -- that in turn allows us to focus on more important activities.
Application of the questions: One client's approach
One of my clients used this set of questions when considering whether or not to consolidate its laboratory data storage systems. Unfortunately, they realised several of their products with extremely long (12+ months) production processes required nearly constant monitoring to ensure successful manufacture. The rest of their data (about 800GB of assorted files and mail systems) could go down for up to 24 hours without meaningful impact on the business.
Running though the questions they found that they really needed two separate storage solutions: one ultra-high availability using a service provider and another using low-cost, solution-provider equipment. They then took the idea one step further: rather than complicating their environment, they approached the service provider with their information. As a result, the service provider cut its prices in order to make the ROI on its service better than that of the dual solution. In the end, my client got far more than he needed but at a much more palatable price than he thought possible.
