1. Campus Data Storage & Services Task Force Update IT Pro Forum 9 November 2011

2. Data Storage & Services TF Jason Alt / Michelle Butler, NCSA Mike Corn Office of the CIO, Security & Privacy Jennifer Eardley Division of Biomedical Science; OVCR David GersteneckerACES Gabe Gibson LAS/ATLAS Howard Guenther OVCR Alice JonesAITS/UA Jackie KernFacilities & Services Charley Kline CITES Carol Malmgren Registrar Mike GradyCo-chair, Office of the CIO Beth Sandore Namachchivaya Co-chair. University Library

3. https://wiki.cites.uiuc.edu/wiki/ display/DSST/

4. Objective: help the campus develop a strategy around storage

5. From our charge letter: “develop a comprehensive strategic plan for addressing the central data storage needs of this campus, including specific operational ideas for implementation”

6. Timeline Charge issued in late July Task Force organized in August Survey, meetings, brainstorming, and input from multiple sources (including IT Pros) in September Interim report to Paul Hixson on 10/5/2011; discussed with Paul on 10/10/2011 -- Extended completion date to March 1, 2012 Survey analysis and determination of working groups and their charges in October

7. Timeline (continued) Working groups established and begin their work in November Working group reports due early January 2012, with mini-retreat third week of January 2012 Final report draft by beginning of February Final report review with Paul Hixson & Michael Hites on 2/23/2012 Incorporate any final changes and publish by March 1, 2012

8. What we’ve done so far Establish collaboration environment Develop common agenda Research peer efforts and cloud options Survey and its analysis Prioritization of key needs/issues Use case development

9. What we’ve done so far Interim report—defined questions Charge working groups around questions Involve broader community in conversation

10. Next steps Working groups carry out their charges Each charge highlights the need to: –Continue to collect and describe use cases for storage and related services –Gather input from a variety of individuals and groups, and interact with various related committees –Consider exemplar models and cloud options

11. Next steps Task Force oversees and helps working groups Each working group creates brief report: –Primary storage needs examined –Use cases considered –Storage solutions in place now –Optimal solution for meeting needs –Effective alternate solution

12. Next steps Working groups present their findings at mini-retreat, and along with the Task Force, identify main recommendations for final report

13. Use cases Task Force developing broad use cases, working groups will expand: –Enterprise storage & services –Web storage and services for a unit –Individual storage –Research data storage and services –Working data storage and management –Preservation systems and storage –Instructional needs storage

14. Priority Needs What do the Task Force members think will deliver the biggest impact, starting with the highest priority? –Common good storage with tiered options –Fully subsidized backup services –Consulting services on storage and data mgmt –Preservation & data curation services –Data sharing across boundaries –Assess the needs of researchers –More …

15. Survey Analysis

16. Survey areas: Amount of storage Access methods Storage services and practice Funding Storage strategy Unmet needs Value-added services

17. Storage across campus 50 units responding, representing –Academic / Research / Instruction –Administrative –Auxiliary ~ 7 Petabytes of storage supported across 50 units 9 units support over 90% of the total storage across the 50 units

18. Allocation, Access, Staff Few units have standard allocations/quotas Commonly-used storage access methods: –CIFS –Web-based –External drives (?!) –AFS, NFS Most units dedicate staff to managing storage

19. Storage services Backup: 67% Replication: < 25%; < 10% planned Deduplication: <10%; 10% planned Encryption: 17%; < 5% planned Sensitive date: 47% Cloud storage: 28% (CITES TSR)

20. Growth, projected, & Strategy Primarily reactive to short-term needs Cyclical investments (3-4 year refresh) Stale technology; loss of flexibility

21. Funding & Groups served Most common funding sources: –Unit budget –Research grants Groups most served: –Faculty, staff, graduate students (research)

22. Top three priorities/obstacles Top three priorities: –Increasing storage capacity (or ease of) –Backup and data recovery –Remote access/accessibility Top three obstacles: –Funding –Staffing –Product design

23. Followup questions: More efficient storage solutions? Best practices / availability guidelines? Service balance: storage & tiered services important Need better understanding of needs— research, instruction, administrative For which needs is cloud suited?

24. How can you help? Follow the task force's work on public wiki site (https://wiki.cites.uiuc.edu/wiki/display/D SST/) Add/review/comment on use cases Contact us if your unit is contemplating a large storage investment Contact us with storage problems or issues

25. Questions? Tell us what you think: https://wiki.cites.uiuc.edu/wiki/display/DSST/ https://wiki.cites.uiuc.edu/wiki/display/DSST/