NetApp PowerPoint Template

1
PRESENTATION HAS NOTES FOR EACH SLIDE
Rewriting the Rules for Total Cost of Storage
Ownership Michael Marchi Senior Director,
Enterprise Marketing mjm_at_netapp.com

2
Agenda

• Understanding Total Cost of Storage Ownership
• Methodology for lowering Total Cost of Storage
  Ownership
• Results of third party studies on NetApp and TCO
• How NetApp specifically lowers Total Cost of
  Storage Ownership
• Customer Examples

3
Total Cost of Storage OwnershipFactors That
Effect TCO

• Initial investment cost
• Cost of downtime
• Operational cost

4
Initial Investment CostImportant Considerations

• Initial cost of storage hardware, software, and
  services over 3 year period
• Will data be shared today or in the future?
• Will point and time copies be required?
• Will disaster recovery / replication be required?

5
Single Copy Data Sharing
6
Network Centric Database Example
7
Point-In-Time Copies
25
20
15
TB's
10
5
0
EMC Symmetrix
F880
F880c
Assumes 5 data change per Snapshot
8
Disaster Recovery
X 2
9
Information Availability - Cost of Downtime

• Financial Performance
• revenue recognition
• cash flow
• lost discounts (A/P)
• payment guarantees
• credit rating
• stock price

Know your downtime costs per hour, day, two days,
etc.

• Other Expenses
• Temporary employees, equipment rental, overtime
  costs, extra shipping costs, travel expenses, etc.

• Source GartnerGroup

10
Measuring Cost of Downtime

• Cost of downtime/hr for application data on
  storage subsystems
• X
• Hours of planned downtime
• (measure current versus proposed)
• Hours of unplanned downtime
• (measure current versus proposed)

Storage Apps Servers
11
Causes of Downtime
12
Minimizing Planned Downtime

• Planned downtime is a major contributor to
  dataavailability
• NetApp storage appliances require planned
  downtime of 30 minutes annually
• Compared to a 38 hours of downtime with a
  conventional solution
• At a rate of 50K per hour, this translates to
  lost revenue of 1.9 million compared to 31K
  with Network Appliance

13
Minimizing Planned Downtime

• Snapshots
• Online Backup with zero application downtime
• Perform backups from Snapshot will production
  volume remains online
• Store 31 Snapshots online with minimal overhead
• Non-disruptive upgrades
• Transparent scalability
• Adding storage (shelves and drives) with zero
  application downtime (and app servers too!)

14
Causes of Unplanned Downtime
Technology Failures
20
40
?
40
Application Errors
?
Operator Errors
Source GartnerGroup, 1999
15
Storage Management Costs
Hardware
0.35 per MB - one time initial investment cost
Management
3.50 per MB - operational cost per year
Source SNIA, 10/99
16
Operational Cost Activities

• Backup and recovery
• Supplying data where needed - revenue and profit
  opportunity
• Management and operations - costs escalate, can't
  hire skilled staff
• Scaling storage infrastructure
• Reducing latency
• 7x24 availability

17
Lowering Total Cost of Storage OwnershipMethodolo
gy

• Select architecture that provides lowest TCO
• Evaluate and select vendor that provides lowest
  TCO within that architecture
• Evaluate utilizing lowest TCO architecture and
  vendor solution for all new project deployments

18
TCO Architecture Choices
LOWER T C O
19
GartnerGroupTotal Cost of Storage Ownership
Report

• NAS cost saving is 13,650 per storage
  expansion when compared to SAN

20
GartnerGroup

• NAS offers lower cost per storage unit while
  decreasing systems administration costs
• The implementation of a large SAN requires
  significant initial effort and expense that may
  be recovered over time

Source Gartner Viewpoint - NAS or SAN choose
the best strategy for your enterprise August 21,
2001
21
TCO Study byDetails

• 63 users of data storage solutions surveyed with
  all solutions running Oracle database
  applications
• Respondents were asked to provide data
  availability service levels, quantify time spent
  on database administration tasks, and describe
  back up and recovery procedures.
• Respondents were asked to provide product
  implementation support operations
  maintenance and downtime costs.

22
TCO Study bySurvey Respondents by Annual Company
Revenue
23
TCO Study bySurvey Respondents by Industry
Segment
24
TCO Study bySurvey Result by Vendor Brand
25
TCO Study byDatabase Allocation for Application
Types
Percentage of Respondents
26
TCO Study by

• Executive Summary
• The total cost of owning the Network Appliance
  solution is 70 lower than owning SAN solutions
  from Compaq, EMC, or Hitachi Data Systems

27
TCO Study byDatabase Size Growth Next 12
Months
Growth Rate
25 30 30 50
28
TCO Study byScaling AVG Time Required to Scale
Up by 200 GB.
30 minutes
29
TCO Study byIT Staff Utilization
30
TCO Study byUser Satisfaction and Data
Availability
Highest
31
TCO Study byData Availability
32
TCO Study byTotal Cost of Ownership per Annum
NetApp savings 75 80 70
33
Collaborative TCO Reports Say The Same
34
TCO Study byData Storage Consolidation in a
Windows Environment

• Executive Summary
• Across the board, based on the experiences
  and opinions of the customers surveyed, Network
  Appliances Windows data consolidation solution
  was determined to be the most cost-effective
  solution for optimizing data storage and high
  data availability over an entire IT enterprise

35
TCO Study byData Storage Consolidation in a
Windows Environment

• Executive Summary
• Based on INPUTs research, total cost of
  ownership and ongoing capital cost advantages, as
  well as efficiency, availability, and
  backup/recovery benefits are virtually guaranteed
  in every implementation

36
NetApp Research on TCO

• Lower Total Cost of Ownership

3-year TCO Comparisons
www.netapp.com
37
Lowering Total Cost of Storage OwnershipMethodolo
gy

• Select architecture that provides lowest TCO
• Evaluate and select vendor that provides lowest
  TCO within that architecture
• Evaluate utilizing lowest TCO architecture and
  vendor solution for all new project deployments

38
Lowering Operational Costs

• The average number of file restorations from
  tape each year per site is 144
• Strategic Research
• The result is lost productivity for the user
  and additional work for the IT Helpdesk.

39
Snapshot

• Read Only images of entire file system
• Very low overhead point-in-time reflects the
  state of the file system at the time it was
  created
• Benefits
• Perform Backups from SnapShot while production
  volume remains online
• Eliminate tape interaction for retrieving deleted
  or corrupted files
• Store 31 Snapshots online with minimal overhead

40
Lowering Operational Costs

• The average number of full file system
  restorations from tape each year per site is 2
• Strategic Research

41
SnapRestore Database Recovery Example

• 750 GB database and the entire database requires
  recovery
• Tape recovery time is 60 GB/hour
• Normal recovery time is 12 ½ hours log replay
  time
• SnapRestore reverts volume to same state as when
  backup was taken. Duration - 90 seconds
• Total recovery time 90 seconds log replay time

42
Lowering Operational Costs

• The average amount of system administration
  time spent on disk grooming each year per site is
  248 hours.
• The annual amount of user productivity lost
  per site due to disk grooming each year is 3262
  hours.
• Strategic Research
• The result is lost productivity for users and IT
  administrators

43
Lowering Operational Costs

NetApps 100 Compatible Product Line - File
system expansion
Simple expandability File system not limited by
disk shelf Result Less administration Flexibili
ty
Initial file system
44
Lowering Operational Costs

• 15 minute installation
• No need for tuning. Self tuning appliance
• Integrated RAID. No RAID administration
• 3 minute software upgrades

45
Network Centric TCO Analysis3 Year
Source Network Appliance
46
Lowering Total Cost of Storage OwnershipMethodolo
gy

• Select architecture that provides lowest TCO
• Evaluate and select vendor that provides lowest
  TCO within that architecture
• Evaluate utilizing lowest TCO architecture and
  vendor solution for all new project deployments

47
New Project DeploymentsLowest TCO is with NetApp
48
Customer Examples

49
Network Appliance Customer Example

• 580 Terabytes
• Numerous remote locations
• 10 administrators
• 58 TB per administrator

50
Bank of Oklahoma

• DeploymentTwo F740s, supporting 3,200 Microsoft
  Exchange users in five states
• Initial Cost Savings of 70,000
• Consolidated server tasks, thus reducing hardware
  expense costs for maintenance, training,
  personnel
• Reduced number of servers managed by 20
• Re-deployed 4 older servers for other tasks
• With NetApp, expansion isnt an issue. We simply
  mount another disk or shelf. And we dont need to
  take the system offlinea huge plus in the case
  ofour Exchange application
• SnapManagerhas made tape backups the last
  resort. SnapManager takes a matter of seconds or
  minutesto restore the data

51
GTE

• DeploymentTwo F630s One F540, supporting
  hundreds of thousands of Internet customers
• 200 increase in availability over local disk
• Ability to scale environment to meet anticipated
  growth and add NT servers as needed for CPU
  capacity
• 10 20 performance improvement for large file
  structures
• We have experienced no downtime since installing
  the NetApp filers
• NetApp filers eliminate this restriction of
  large file structureswe spend less time on
  administration, saving a considerable amount of
  money
• We have been extremely impressed withthe
  support provided by Network Appliance
• With the help of Network Appliances quota
  solution, we were able to lower our overhead
  significantly

52
National Semiconductor

• DeploymentNine filers, supporting 4 TB of data
  and 700 clients on a 100Mb network with Sun
  servers
• 90 decrease in restores from tape
• Users restore their own deleted files.
• Snapshots are taken twice daily Users are never
  more than 12 hours away from the latest copy
  usually its more like 2 or 3 hours.
• Increased capacity several-fold without adding
  systems administrators
• The filers dont have a complex operating
  systemso I do upgradesmyself in about 20
  minutes
• We compared storage solutions, and theres
  really nothing else in the market that does so
  much with so little administrative overhead
• We tested the filer and found it more reliable
  and simpler to administer than the other
  products
• Im very happy with the filers and so are
  our users

53
National Instruments

• DeploymentSingle filer with 900GBs of data,
  supporting a full suite of Oracle database
  applications.
• NetApp filers save at least 40 hours of downtime
  annually
• Filers eliminate the need to spend time on disk
  layout.
• With NetApp, storage expansion can be done with
  zero downtime
• With conventional storage adding capacity
  resulted in 8 hours of downtime
• By simply taking a Snapshot of the database
  before the developers implement any changes,
  they can be sure that if the change does not work
  outthey can restore the databasein just
  minutes.
• NetApp filers are easy to install, are easy to
  maintain, minimize downtime otherwise associated
  with locally attached disks, and provide new
  flexibility
• We will continue to consider NetApp
  filersbecause they do exactly what theyre
  supposed to do.

54
GTSI

• Deployment
• 1TB filer, supporting 500 users on business
  critical databases associated with Siebel
  applications
• NetApp for the low TCO
• Lower initial investment
• Lower service costs over a 3 5 year timeframe
• Performance also key
• Filer outperformed internal arrays by as much as
  20
• The NetApp filer outperformed the internal
  arrays every time.
• We looked at a lot of good solutions from other
  vendors, but stringent testing and
  total-cost-of-ownership evaluations proved the
  NetApp system to be the best solution at the best
  price.
• Looking at competitive proposals over a 3 5
  year time period, we realized that the service
  costs alone were tens of thousands of dollars
  more than the NetApp solution.

55
Continental Airlines

• Deployment2 filers running multiple database
  applications with more than 4 TB of data
• Filers saved almost 6 hours in backup restore
• For an application on a 150GB domain, backup
  restore functions would each take 6 hours
• Snapshots reduced the time required for backup
  restore to 5 minutes
• With this filer architecturewe never have to
  bring an application down if there is a problem
  with one domain.
• The fast access to data and the overall
  outstanding performance of the filers, are extra
  benefits for us. The most important capabilities
  of the filers in our implementation are Snapshot,
  SnapRestore, and overall performance
  reliability.
• You just plug it in, turn it on, and you have
  immediate access to the storage it really
  is that simple.

56
Case Study FANUC Robotics

• Deployment2 filers one supporting 500
  engineers for CAD drawings 1,200 employee home
  directories one supporting BaaN ERP application
• Chose NetApp for the low TCO
• Ability to redeploy existing server resources and
  postpone the need for new equipment in other
  departments which ultimately covered the cost
  of the NetApp filer
• Performance also key
• Improved application performance without a major
  hardware investment
• NetApp filers providecapabilities more
  cost-effectively than any of the competitive
  solutions evaluated
• We have had rock-solid performance from the
  NetApp system
• NetApp takes ownership to make sure that we
  get the technical resources we need.

57
Final Thoughts

• Challenge is often to manage petabytes of
  geographically dispersed data
• TCO is a key storage imperative
• NetApp continues to gain market share
• NetApp provides superior TCO
• Initial investment cost
• Cost of downtime
• Operational costs