TechOpsGuys.com Diggin' technology every day

September 12, 2010

Google waves goodbye to Mapreduce

Filed under: News — Tags: , — Nate @ 9:05 am

From the group of people that brought the Map Reduce algorithm to a much broader audience (despite the concepts being decades old), Google has now outgrown it and is moving on according to our friends at The Register.

The main reason behind it is map reduce was hindering their ability to provide near real time updates to their index. So they migrated their Search infrastructure to a Bigtable distributed database. They also optimized the next generation Google file system for this database, making it inappropriate for more general uses.

MapReduce is a sequence of batch operations, and generally, Lipkovits explains, you can’t start your next phase of operations until you finish the first. It suffers from “stragglers,” he says. If you want to build a system that’s based on series of map-reduces, there’s a certain probability that something will go wrong, and this gets larger as you increase the number of operations. “You can’t do anything that takes a relatively short amount of time,” Lipkovitz says, “so we got rid of it.”

I have to wonder how much this new distributed database-based index was responsible for Google to be able to absorb upwards of a 7 fold increase in search traffic due to the Google Instant feature being launched.

I had an interview at a company a couple of months ago that was trying to use Hadoop + Map Reduce  for near real-time operations (the product had not launched yet), and thought that wasn’t a very good use of the technology. It’s a batch processing system. Google of course realized this and ditched it when it could no longer scale to the levels of performance that they needed (despite having an estimated 1.8 million servers at their disposal).

As more things get closer to real time I can’t help but wonder about all those other companies out there that have hopped on the Hadoop/Map Reduce bandwagon, when they will realize this and try once again to follow the food crumbs that Google is dropping.

I just hope for those organizations, that they don’t compete with Google in any way, because they will be at a severe disadvantage from a few angles:

  • Google has a near infinite amount of developer resources internally and as one Yahoo! person said “[Google] clearly demonstrated that it still has the organizational courage to challenge its own preconceptions,”
  • Google has a near infinite hardware capacity and economies of scale. What one company may pay $3-5,000 for, Google probably pays less than $1,000. They are the largest single organization that uses computers in the world. They are known for getting special CPUs,. and everyone at cloud scale operates with specialized motherboard designs. They build their own switches and routers (maybe). Though last I heard they are still a massive user of Citrix Netscaler load balancers.
  • Google of course operates it’s own high end, power efficient data centers which means they get many more servers per kW than you can get in a typical data center. I wrote earlier in the year about a new container that supports 45 kilowatts per rack, more than ten times your average data center.
  • Google is the world’s third largest internet carrier and due to peering agreements pays almost nothing for bandwidth.

Google will be releasing more information about their new system soon, I can already see the army of minions out there gearing up to try to duplicate the work and try to remain competitive. ha ha! I wouldn’t want to be them, that’s all I can say 🙂

[Google’s] Lipokovitz stresses that he is “not claiming that the rest of the world is behind us.”

Got to admire the modesty!

September 9, 2010

ZFS Free and clear.. or is it?

Filed under: News,Random Thought,Storage — Tags: , — Nate @ 7:03 pm

So, Sun and Oracle kissed and made up recently over the lawsuits they had against each other, from our best friends at The Register –

Whatever the reasons for the mutual agreement to dismiss the lawsuits, ZFS technology product users and end-users can feel relieved that a distracting lawsuit has been cleared away.

Since the terms of the settlement or whatever you want to call it have not been disclosed and there has been no apparent further comment from either side, I certainly wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that other ZFS users are in the clear. I view it as if your running ZFS on Solaris your fine, if your using OpenSolaris your probably fine too. But if your using it on BSD, or even Linux (or whatever other platforms folks have tried to port ZFS to over the years), anything that isn’t directly controlled by Oracle, I wouldn’t be wiping the sweat from my brow just yet.

As is typical with such cases the settlement (at least from what I can see) is specifically between the two companies, there have been no statements or promises from either side from a broader technology standpoint.

I don’t know what OS folks like Coraid, and Compellent use on their ZFS devices, but I recall when investigating NAS options for home use I was checking out Thecus, a model like the N770+ and among the features was a ZFS option. The default file system was ext3, and supported XFS as well. While I am not certain, I was pretty convinced the system was running Linux in order to be supporting XFS and ext3, and not running OpenSolaris. I ended up not going with Thecus because as far as I could tell they were using software RAID. Instead I bought a new workstation(previous computer was many years old), and put a 3Ware 9650SE RAID controller(with a battery backup unit and 256MB of write back cache) along with four 2TB disks(RAID 1+0).

Now as and end user I can see not really being concerned, it is unlikely Netapp or Oracle will go after end users using ZFS on Linux or BSD or whatever, but if your building a product based on it(with the intension of selling/licensing it), and you aren’t using an ‘official’ version, I would stay on my toes. If your product doesn’t compete against any of NetApp’s product lines then you may skirt by without attracting attention. And as long as your not too successful Oracle probably won’t come kicking down your door.

Unless of course further details are released and the air is cleared more about ZFS as a technology in general.

Interestingly enough I was reading a discussion on Slashdot I think, around the time Oracle bought Sun and folks became worried about the future of ZFS in the  open source world. And some were suggesting as far as Linux was concerned btrfs, which is the Linux community’s response to ZFS. Something I didn’t know at the time was that apparently btrfs is also heavily supported by Oracle(or at least it was, I don’t track progress on that project).

Yes I know btrfs is GPL, but as you know I’m sure a file system is a complicated beast to get right. And if Oracle’s involvement in the project is significant and they choose instead to for whatever reason drop support and move resources to ZFS, well that could leave a pretty big gap that will be hard to fill. Just because the code is there doesn’t mean it’s going to magically code itself. I’m sure others contribute, I don’t know what the ratio of support is from Oracle vs outsiders. I recall reading at one point for OpenOffice something like 75-85% of the development was done directly by Sun Engineers. Just something to keep in mind.

I miss reiserfs. I really did like reiserfs v3 way back when. And v4 certainly looked promising (never tried it).

Reminds me of the classic argument that so many make for using open source stuff (not that I don’t like open source, I use it all the time). That is if there is a bug in the program you can go in and fix it yourself. My own experience at many companies is the opposite, they encounter a bug and they go through the usual community channels to try to get a fix. I would say it’s a safe assumption to say in excess of 98% of users of open source code have no ability to comprehend or fix the source they are working with. And that comes from my own experience of working for, really nothing but software companies over the past 10 years. And before anyone asks, I believe it’s equally improbable that a company would hire a contractor to fix a bug in an open source product. I’m sure it does happen, but pretty rare given the number of users out there.

September 2, 2010

Dell concedes to HP

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 8:04 am

It’s over. Dell has said it will not raise it’s offer any more.

Dell Inc. says it will not match Palo Alto-based Hewlett-Packard’s offer to pay $33 per share for 3Par Inc., or about $2.07 billion.

Probably will write more later 🙂 Been a busy morning.

Dell’s last stand

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 6:29 am

So apparently the news is official, 3PAR has determined the new $33/share bid is superior. Dell seems to be conceding defeat at this point. Apparently as part of Dell’s recent $32/share increased bid they also negotiated a long term reseller agreement that would somehow continue even if HP ends up buying 3PAR.

From 3PAR –

HP’s revised proposal of $33 per share values 3PAR at approximately $2.4 billion

Although 3PAR previously notified Dell of its intention to terminate its merger agreement with Dell, the merger agreement was not terminated and remains in full force and effect. Following 3PAR’s notice of intent to terminate the merger agreement, and prior to receiving HP’s revised acquisition proposal, 3PAR received a revised acquisition proposal from Dell in which Dell increased its offer price from $27 per share to $32 per share. Dell’s revised acquisition proposal also included an increased termination fee of $92 million payable by 3PAR to Dell as a condition to accepting a “superior proposal,” and a multi-year reseller agreement with Dell, which would by its terms be assumed by an acquirer of, or successor in interest to, 3PAR in the event of a change in control of 3PAR (including the acquisition of 3PAR by HP or another third party), and which contained fixed pricing and other terms that the 3PAR board of directors determined to be unacceptable.

So it sounds given the length of time that elapsed for Dell to get this new deal done and how decisive HP has been, Dell likely won’t come back again, and will instead rely on the reseller agreement to get 3PAR technology on the side. Interesting strategy,

I wonder if HP will try to terminate that, even if it means going to court just to block Dell from capitalizing on their pending investment. I would put money down that they will.

If they don’t I wonder how it will make Dell’s customers feel buying HP product from Dell? I mean with all of the sparkling HP logos plastered all over it.

I also believe Dell is putting the final nails in the coffin with their partnership with EMC with this move. EMC has a lot to lose if both HP and Dell are pitching 3PAR technology to their respective customers.

Just goes to show the value that 3PAR brings to the table.

(edited to strike out references to the reseller agreement since I obviously read too quickly before posting, just shows how excited I am I guess!! (not uncommon!) )

HP now offernig $33/share for 3PAR

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 6:04 am

Not much details  yet, just notice that HP has upped it’s bid to $33/share for 3PAR a few minutes ago. The front page of the Wall Street Journal has about all I’ve heard from CNBC

Hewlett-Packard has raised its bid for 3PAR to $33 a share; Dell also offered a higher price and negotiated a higher breakup fee

What it seems like is at the last minute Dell finally came through with something around $30/share, sounds like they really struggled to get that one through. HP of course being decisive came back immediately with $33/share.

Here is another article that says the reason why the bidding is so intensive is 3PAR is the only game in town, there is no room for second best –

Looking at the landscape, 3Par is the only real alternative to EMC and Hitachi in terms of high end storage.  EMC has its own ambitions for data center dominance, while HDS is part of a much larger conglomerate.  If you believe you need to own storage and server, both to fulfill the vision above and to avoid partnering with a competitor, than 3Par is the only place to get this type of deep high end storage technology.  Given HP and Dell have a much larger sales channel than 3Par, these guys can immediately double, triple or quadruple sales from 3Par products overnight once it is part of their catalogue.  Both reasons afford the premium we are seeing.

August 30, 2010

Dell vs HP in R&D

Filed under: News — Tags: , , — Nate @ 9:50 am

Came across this link on Data Center Knowledge to Forbes online –

In fiscal 2010 (ended January 31st), Dell spent $617 million for R&D, or 1.2% of sales [..] an R&D budget like that isn’t going to cut it.

[..]Hewlett Packard, the larger company, already has more going on. In the trailing 12 months, it spent $2.849 billion here, or 2.3% of sales.

[..] Assuming both want to stay relevant five years hence, 3Par looks like it will be a bargain for whichever firm wins this bidding war and likely there will be some incredibly long and tense meetings in the conference rooms of the firm that loses.

And another link from Data Center Knowledge to the Boston Globe, which says something I don’t really agree with –

EMC has also partnered with Dell to allow the computer company to resell high-end network storage products made by EMC. But that arrangement would be severely tested if Dell winds up buying 3Par, giving Dell its own high-end storage provider.

For that reason Kerravala said EMC will most likely fare better if HP ends up winning the 3Par bidding war.

“At least that will preserve EMC’s partnership with Dell,’’ he said.

In the short term it will of course preserve the EMC partnership, but the rift has been created by Dell, showing EMC it’s not willing to sit by and just refer sales along to the EMC direct sales team much longer. I’m sure EMC realizes it’s days are numbered as a tight partner with Dell(hence it’s partnership with Cisco UCS which I’m sure didn’t make Dell a happy camper).

I don’t see Dell going to HDS if they lose out on 3PAR, they probably wouldn’t look that hot if they went to HDS’s arms so soon after HP and Sun/Oracle ditched them.

Dell getting cold feet

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 7:59 am

3PAR announced today:

3PAR® (NYSE: PAR), the leading global provider of utility storage, today announced its board of directors has determined that the unsolicited proposal by Hewlett-Packard Company to acquire all of 3PAR’s outstanding common stock at $30 per share constitutes a “superior proposal” (as that term is defined in 3PAR’s previously announced merger agreement with Dell). The 3PAR board of directors notified Dell of its intention to terminate the merger agreement with Dell, immediately following the expiration of the three business day period contemplated by, and the satisfaction of the other conditions set forth in, the merger agreement with Dell, in order to enter into the merger agreement with HP on the terms set forth in HP’s acquisition proposal.

CNBC looked at a couple of past storage deals to compare the valuations of them vs the current deal:

  • HP’s latest bid is 8.5 times 3PAR’s current projected revenue, 10 times last year’s revenue
  • Dell paid 10 times revenue for Equallogic back in 2007; valuation now looks smart
  • EMC paid 8 times revenue for Data Domain last year  (too early to tell how it’s working out according to CNBC)

Tick, tock Dell. Throw in the towel go after Compellent or Pillar or maybe even Xiotech.

Looks like 3PAR announced a pretty big deal which has 3cV in it, expecting a lot more in the future!

With this new partnership, Nissho adds a disaster recovery (DR) solution to its enhanced service offerings, which currently include public cloud development and a private cloud environment service based on 3cV. “3cV” is a proven blueprint for the virtual datacenter featuring the combination of 3PAR Utility Storage, HP® BladeSystem c-Class Server Blades, and VMware vSphere™. This solution is designed to enable improved server efficiency and to enhance service levels in private cloud datacenters. All the cloud service-focused products that Nissho offers, including those based on 3cV, are available at the company’s CloudNagivate Center, Nissho’s private technology verification center where customers can verify the operation and performance of a cloud-based infrastructure built on 3PAR technology.

Dell simply doesn’t have an answer to HP’s c Class blades.

August 27, 2010

CNBC Videos on 3PAR

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 12:32 pm

I’ve watched CNBC for a long time, I find it pretty entertaining, even though I don’t invest.

So often these mergers come about usually about industries and companies I have no interest in and can’t really gauge whether the analysts know what they are talking about.

This one is different of course as a user of 3PAR products for the past 3 years or so I know their stuff inside and out. And I’m constantly looking out for other interesting technologies.

Here’s several videos

HP Now offering $2 billion

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 8:46 am

Dell apaprently is being a little bitch again and matched HP’s $27 offer for 3PAR, so HP came right back and offered $30 a share, or $2 billion, up from the $1.1 billion original offer from Dell ($18/share).

PALO ALTO, Calif., Aug 27, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) — HP /quotes/comstock/13*!hpq/quotes/nls/hpq (HPQ 37.66, -0.56, -1.47%) today announced that it has increased its proposal to acquire all of the outstanding shares of 3PAR Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!par/quotes/nls/par (PAR 31.71, +5.68, +21.82%) to $30 per share in cash, or an enterprise value of $2.0 billion. The proposal represents an 11 percent premium above the most recent price offered by Dell Inc. of $27 per share. HP’s proposal is not subject to any financing contingency and has been approved by HP’s board of directors. Once approved by 3PAR’s board, HP expects the transaction to close by the end of the calendar year.

Cut your losses and run Dell. Go buy Compellent.

August 26, 2010

Thank you HP

Filed under: News,Storage — Tags: — Nate @ 4:05 pm

That’s more like it, HP knows what they are doing, they just boosted their offer to $27/share for 3PAR.

SEATTLE (AP) — Hewlett-Packard Co. has again raised its bid for 3Par Inc. above an offer from rival Dell Inc., suggesting that the little-known data-storage maker could be worth more with one of the PC companies’ marketing muscle behind it.

The latest offer from HP for $27 per share in cash, or about $1.69 billion, is nearly three times what 3Par had been trading at before Dell made the first bid last week.

Bring it on. Did I ever mention 3PAR went IPO on my birthday? Coincidence yeah I know but maybe it was a sign.. if I recall right they were supposed to IPO one day earlier but something delayed it by one day. I never did buy any stock(as I mentioned before I don’t buy stocks or bonds).

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress