CommVault introduces an updated version of their all-encompassing Simpana suite

CommVault is one of those enterprise IT companies that likes to go their own way. A spin-out of AT&T’s famed Bell Labs, CommVault’s Simpana software integrates many aspects of data management, from backup to e-discovery, under one umbrella. Last year, the company impressed me by adding cloud storage as a backup target equal in status to disk and traditional tape. Now the company is doing the same for storage-based snapshots, accelerating data protection for virtual machines.

Simpana 9: A Broad Update

Nearly every aspect of CommVault’s Simpana 9 is refreshed, though development and unveiling has been an ongoing process throughout the year. Following Simpana 8 by two years, the new software integrates work done integrating cloud storage and virtual machine backup over the last year or so. The “data management” portion of the product (including backup, archiving, and replication) was detailed this week, and one expects more information about the other half (“information management”) to be forthcoming.

Simpana 9 is available as of October 5 from OEMs, resellers, also direct from CommVault. Pricing is simplified this time around with CommVault using a capacity licensing model. Cost is based on the largest backup or archiving job, though the old licensing model still still available. A “circuit breaker reset” allows the system to go over the licensed level temporarily in a pinch.

Pick Your Target: Tape, Disk, Cloud, or Snapshot

There has been a long-standing back-and-forth discussion in the enterprise backup community regarding snapshots as backups. My stance has been that, while snapshots are certainly a more-effective mechanism for copying data than dump-to-tape, it takes more than data to have a useful backup. Any system worth using must schedule, manage, organize, and recover data. Therefore, although snapshot-based backup is a good idea, it wasn’t ready for prime time until it was integrated with a solid backup management system.

Elevating snapshots as a first-class backup target is exactly what CommVault is doing. Just as their earlier releases added cloud as a backup target, Simpana 9 makes snapshots just another option. Commvault recognizes that needs change over the lifecycle of a backup, and the location of data should change, too. A snapshot makes an excellent “operational recovery” target, allowing frequent copying and quick restore, but is sub-optimal for long-term archiving. Conversely, tape is a poor frequent target due to its linear nature but has proven itself for long-term offline archive.

Simpana 8 supported HDS and Dell for snapshots, now Simpana 9 adds volume leaders EMC and NetApp, along with HP, IBM, LSI, and Sun. Data is indexed and cataloged, and these are stored with the data on disk, tape, or cloud for later access. Speaking of cloud, Simpana 9 supports Amazon, Azure, Nirvanix, Rackspace, Iron Mountain, EMC Atmos, Dell DX, and HDS HCP.

You might also want to read CommVault Gives Cloud Storage A Seat At The Adult Table

VM Backup Acceleration

CommVault was demonstrating their abilities to back up machines using VMware VADP at VMworld. There, they took just 17 minutes to back up 500 machines using snapshots on an IBM XIV storage array. I imagine most of the supported platforms could do just as well.

Simpana 9 automatically discovers running guests using VMware vCenter. This allows for daily movement of machines since they are located each time and the backups are coordinated for universal, consistent coverage. No machines will be missed, either. In fact, given that many snapshots work on a block level, it would be impossible to not backup up clients sharing the same LUN.

On the back side, Simpana uses an ESXi proxy to grab snap content and catalog the virtual machines contained there. It then moves the data off to disk, tape, or cloud just like any other backup content.

CommVault is also working on Hyper-V support, using VSS rather than VADP.

Universal Dedupe

The third element of Simpana 9 is integrated source and target deduplication. Simpana’s client software deduplicates local data on its own before sending it to the server. These deduped blocks are then checked against the universal set on the server before being stored, potentially bringing a “best of both worlds” solution to the source-versus-target argument.

Migration to Simpana 9 From NetBackup and TSM

One of the long-standing criticisms of Simpana is that it was just too far-reaching for easy testing, migration, and uptake. It has been seen as an all-or-nothing proposition, requiring a commitment that is hard to win and harder to back away from in the event of trouble.

Simpana 9 addresses part of this concern with a so-called “Fast Pass” migration system that allows configuration to be pulled in from more-traditional backup products for a seamless transition. The Simpana data connector talks to NBU 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 and TSM 6.1 master server, discovers backup policies, and imports these (clients, schedule, history, etc) into the new configuration. Then automatic install software pushes CommVault agents into place and takes over operations, leaving the old system running for historical recoveries only.

Stephen’s Stance

I love the idea of promoting data from operational snapshots to tape or cloud for archiving. And I love the idea that end-users can choose the combination that fits their needs within a unified package. I’ve long been a fan of CommVault’s products, and this upgrade makes them that much more compelling. I’ll leave it to wiser minds to debate their implementation and effectiveness, but it sure looks good for me. The simplified licensing and purchasing model is welcome, too – backup is a thorny combination of pricing models.

The idea of migrating seamlessly from old to new is interesting, but I wonder how well it will work in practice. My time as a backup consultant taught me that these environments tend to be complicated, finicky, and outdated. It’s nice that CommVault can read in a TSM 6.1 configuration, but what about older versions? The same goes for NetBackup. And will it correctly handle the weird rule sets found there? But a greater issue is whether it should import the old settings at all: Perhaps migrating to a new backup system is a good time to revisit the assumptions behind your configuration!

All in all, Simpana 9 looks like a compelling update for CommVault lovers or those disaffected by their current platform. Organizations having difficulty meeting backup windows should also give it a look, since the snapshot technology should be a big help there. And anyone looking at cloud storage as a backup and archiving target should start with CommVault. Others will certainly be intrigued, but I am not sure that they will be compelled to upgrade by these features alone.

© Stephen Foskett for Gestalt IT, 2010. | CommVault Simpana 9 Takes Backup To A New Level
Read more posts categorized as Server Virtualization, Storage

This is rather limiting from an end-user IT consumer’s point of view because you still find yourselves locked into a vendor or a group of vendors. So it’s only dynamic with constraints; actually, I think Amazon got it right in their naming, it’s Elastic but not truly Dynamic.

So as a good architect/designer/bodge-it-and-scarper-type person, you should be asking this question every time; if I do this, can I get out? What is my exit plan? Can I change any key component of the stack without major process/capability impact? Is the lock-in which comes with any unique feature worth it?

And when I say any component, I mean all the way up to the application. So as part of the non-functional requirements of any application, there should be:

1. Data Export/Import
2. Archival

standards defined and actually implemented. This goes for any off-the-shelf application as well.

For Cloud to truly change the way IT is done and delivered; this has to be done..otherwise the only way is vertically integrated stacks, which ultimately lead to long-term lock-in. There are still mainframes in existence, not only because they are the right platform for some workloads but also because people are struggling to unpick the complex interdependencies which exist.

© Martin for Gestalt IT, 2010. | What is Dynamic?
Read more posts categorized as Cloud Computing, Server Virtualization

In the past, end users privately voiced frustration with Kazeon’s toolkit. They complained that it failed to scale to ingest enterprise-class jobs and that the complex solution was prone to failure, prompting time-consuming re-scans. The e-discovery space is a complex one, with companies duking it out with regard to the proper orientation: Should records management, data archiving, data search, storage management, or legal lead the e-discovery charge? Kazeon came from the technical data search and storage management space, a good match for EMC.

Kazeon raised over $60 million in their 6 years of existence. They faced a difficult market and were reportedly only able to bring in $7 in revenue in the last 12 months. EMC reportedly paid $75 million for the company, a fair price given Kazeon’s challenges.

© Stephen Foskett for Gestalt IT, 2009. | EMC (e)Discovers Kazeon Systems
Read more posts categorized as Exclusive, Featured, Storage, Top Story

For example, if you have all your data on expensive filers with expensive software licenses and it is the latter that is the killer especially when the license is based on the capacity of the array not on how much of the licensed feature is used, it would make sense to keep the useage of that array down to the minimum; so get data off it as quickly as possible and onto a lower-cost medium, be it an archive array with minimal features or tape, if you so desire.

But surely this is the promise of HSM or ILM? Surely this is the thing which has been talked about for years but everyone agrees it is too hard, the ROI doesn’t stack up etc? But as Zilla points out, data management doesn’t have to be complicated; it can be as simple as deleting what you don’t use any more and archiving more. We probably need to look at the tools and continue to simplify but data management needs to become something we talk about a lot more.

Actually, I wonder if we are going to sleep walk into another issue with VMs; it is going to get so easy to spin a VM up for a quick piece of testing, development or whatever and then people are just going to keep them hanging around, just in case. So it won’t just be files we have a problem with; it’s going to be whole environments.

Perrhaps we should just stop making things so easy for people!?

© Martin for Gestalt IT, 2009. | Data Management – Industrial Light and Magic
Read more posts categorized as Server Virtualization, Storage