Don't want unified file, block and object storage

Don't want unified file, block and object storage

HDS has announced HUS which combines block, file and object storage. Well, almost, but is it a good thing? First HUS uses a block storage controller allied to NAS heads to provide file storage layered on block storage. Both files and blocks are basically blocks of data on disk in a storage array.

I'm going to argue though, that, although objects are basically blocks of data on disk, standard block and file drive arrays are not good for storing objects, IF the object storage vendors are right in their marketing.

They say object storage is needed because filesystems are slow and inefficient when locating one file in a population of billions of files - literally big data. Because object storage technologies use scale-out designs, typically, and have an object's address in a flat storage address space computed in some way from the data content , an object data block is located amongst a set of object storage nodes in a particular way that means it's not best stored in a standard disk array via a block controller with an object storage head.

On that basis we should not mix - unify - object storage with file and block storage.

An irony is that many existing object storage customers are not storing billions of objects at all and a file-folder system would be adequate for them. But the purveyors of object storage have to start small and grow big, and sell other benefits such as self-healing via data integrity checks.

If some object storage applications are never going to get to the billions of objects stored level then, for them, having an object storage head layered onto a filer or a block storage array would be fine, and unified file/block/object storage a way to have one physical silo (with three virtual silos) with less percentage wasted space, one management interface and tool set, and simpler data protection.

In anther object storage case, the one where a file interface has been layered on top, then it may be assumed that having a unified storage array underneath the objects and files, is a good idea too.

So, for real big data object storage I wouldn't think unified storage is a good thing at all. For "little data" object storage unified storage is probably a good thing. Where the dividing line is between big and little object data is debatable and I couldn't guess where it is, other than thinking a billion objects and up is probably in the real object storage area, whereas a million or less is probably in the unified storage area.