1. Reducing ERP Storage Cost

2. How Much Is Complexity Costing You?
This Year Alone, IT Complexity Will Cost Firms Worldwide Some $750 Billion”
TALKING POINTS
This estimate includes a lot of the indirect costs that result from complexity that are very hard to measure
Things like downtime resulting from overly complex environments
Time spent investigating issues and repairing existing systems rather than building new systems and taking advantage of new opportunities
Time spent training your teams on all the different software and tools they will have to use day-in and day-out
IDC, The Economist Oct
Gartner, CIO Today March 22, 2005
“...this year alone IT complexity will cost firms worldwide some $750 billion.”
"Right now, it's all about streamlining IT, companies are tired of complex environments that take a lot of care and feeding."
Tony Picardi, IDC
2 – 1 2 38

3. The Complexity of Heterogeneity
ServiceGuard
PolyServe
JFS2
ReiserFS
SVC
LVM
GPFS
UFS
Sun Cluster
MSCS
ASM
DLM
SAM FS
QFS
TrueCluster
GeoSpan
Ext3
ZFS
TOOLS NEEDED:
LDM
SVM
SAN-FS
JFS
ClusterFrame
HACMP
EVM
SDS
OCFS
QFS
50+ 26 25 27 29 49 30 28 22 18 17 16 19 20 23 31 21 24 34 47 42 41 43 44 46 45 40 39 36 35 33 15 37 38 48 32 10 04 05 03 02 01 06 07 12 13 11 09 08 14
TALKING POINTS
Start by explaining that this is the set of features required to connect applications to data and keep the applications and data available
File system and volume manager manage the storage and make it easier for applications and users to leverage that storage
Multipathing ensures the servers can reach the data and in some cases, it can optimize that path
Replication and snapshots ensure data availability in the case of data corruption, storage hardware failure or a complete site outage
Clustering ensures servers and applications are available in the event of server hardware failure or application issues
ADVANCE SLIDE
If you have a heterogeneous environment, the complexity becomes immediately apparent
To connect your applications to data and keep them available, you may have to use up to 50 different tools
Nobody actually has 50 tools, but most customers we talk to have all 5 server platforms and 2 or three storage vendors
Even if you only have EMC, but you have some Symmetrix and Clariion, you still have two different tools for Replication and two different tools for Snapshots – from the same vendor
This is where you should personalize this to the customer’s environment. Talk about known software they have and try to call out a few of the places where they are using multiple tools for the same thing. This is easy with EMC as done in the bullets above.
SAN Copy
SnapShot
TrueCopy
MirrorView
SnapView
DoubleTake
RepliStor
MPxIO
MPIO
Snap
InstantImage
FlashCopy
PPRC
ShadowImage
HDLM
PowerPath
ShadowCopy
TimeFinder
SRDF
SNDR
SecurePath
MirrorDisk -UX
Data Replication Manager
3 –

4. The Simplicity of Standardization
TOOLS NEEDED: 1
TALKING POINTS
At VERITAS, we are working to help eliminate some of the complexity for you by developing one solution across all platforms and arrays
Storage Foundation HA is the VERITAS Storage Foundation and VERITAS Cluster Server
This integrated solution will help reduce indirect costs like the ones IDC was talking about AND there are opportunities to reduce direct costs.
Many of the software packages on the previous slide are things you pay for, some of them you pay quite a bit of money like HP Operating Environments and Snapshots and Replication software on the array side
We will look at the substantial direct cost saving opportunities in detail in a few minutes
OBJECTION HANDLER
SF for Windows doesn’t have a file system, so someone could accurately point out that you need two tools. This is true, casually dismiss this slide as a little marketing fluff, but re-emphasize the core point.
Storage Foundation HA
4 –

5. Reducing Cost in Your ERP Environment
SOFTWARE COST AVOIDANCE
Server
Software
Storage
LEVERAGE LOWER-COST STORAGE
$20K
$10K
$5K
REDUCE COMPLEXITY
Servers
Storage
TALKING POINTS
Three of the ways we reduce cost in an ERP environment are…
Software cost avoidance and leveraging lower-cost storage are direct cost savings and can be quantified fairly easily. Reduced complexity is much more difficult to quantify.
For the rest of the presentation, we will focus on the quantifiable cost reductions by comparing two scenarios: one with VERITAS and one without VERITAS
5 –

6. Software Cost Avoidance
Without Symantec $
With Symantec
Array Software Stack
OS Software Stack
SFHA
Snapshots
Clustering
Multipathing VM FS
Replication
$$$ $$ $ $
TALKING POINTS
Veritas Storage Foundation HA includes functionality that is licensed in many other software packages.
To get all the functionality of Storage Foundation HA, you have to license many other point tools including native OS clustering, multipathing, array-based replication and array-based copy services
HP actually charges for the file system and volume manager through their Operating Environments. On HP, rather than pay for their Enterprise Operating Environment (which is almost functionally equivalent to SF Standard_ VM
Replication
Snapshots FS
Clustering
Multipathing
Array Software Stack
OS Software Stack
6 –

7. Leverage Lower-cost Storage
TIERED STORAGE
File System
Tier 2
Stale
Tier 1
Critical $
Time
SNAPSHOTS ON LOWER-COST
STORAGE
$20K
$8K
REPLICATION BETWEEN DIS-SIMILAR
ARRAYS
$20K
$8K
TALKING POINTS
Our unique tiered storage solution allows us to put multiple volumes in a single file system and those volumes can have different price characteristics. We allow customers to set policies based on things like file type, last update date, last access date, etc… that will automatically move the file between classes of storage. The file remains ONLINE and the directory path does not change. The application and OS don’t have any idea that we shifted the stored blocks between volumes.
Snapshots: we can put point-in-time copies or BCVs on a different class of storage from the primary. Most array-based solutions for copy services require the BCV to remain in the same frame.
Replication: we can replicate between different classes of storage. Array-based replication typically requires the same storage class at both ends of the replication. The primary site may warrant DMX, but the DR site could most likely be Clariion. With EMC, you can’t mix-and-match.
PROOF FOR TIERED STORAGE – THE WEATHER CHANNEL
The Weather channel implemented Tiered Storage and migrated to Linux. Old weather is more than “24 hours old”. Data being managed grew from 15TB to 58TB in two years.
Migrated from UNIX to Linux and brought in Hitachi Thunder as tier 2 storage when Hitachi Lightning was 90% utilized as only class of storage. Kept Lightning as tier 1, moved much data to tier 2.
Total hard cost savings: $2.6M over three years in two categories, server management and storage management.
Server Management results: $1M TCO reduction over three years by migrating to Linux.
Storage Management results: $1.650M TCO reduction by moving to a tiered storage model. $1M in hardware, $600K in maintenance.
Storage Admin productivity increased from 2.3TB per admin to 9.6TB per admin at the same time. If quantified, this would be a $1.4M personnel savings over 3 years. This was not included in the previous numbers.
Soft dollar savings on meteorologist productivity: $432K attributed to online defragmentation and off-host backup with SF Linux and FlashSnap Option.
Video testimonial at: mms://wm.veritas-global.speedera.net/wm.veritas-global/2005/customer_videos/Weather channel_hi.wmv
See the VERITAS case study for more details
PROOF 2 FOR TIERED STORAGE – FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY
A government agency is using tiered storage for a data mining application
They collect tons of data from a variety of sources, analysts pound on it very hard for a short period of time, then the analysis activity dies down considerably
They use Tier 1 for the active data and a much lower tier for the less active data
PROOF 3 FOR TIERED STORAGE – IMPLEMENTATION IN PROGRESS, BUT THE VISION IS DESCRIBED BELOW
One of our customers in the outsourcing business (a telco) has an application with 80% inactive data. The total data volume is 1 PB today with rapid growth.
They are looking at many millions of dollars in cost savings by implementing tiered storage.
In their case, this model dramatically understates the true savings because they are going to back up the inactive data (800TB) weekly and the active data 200TB daily. They used to back up all of the data daily.
PROOF FOR SNAPSHOTS ON LOWER TIERS – PHILADELPHIA STOCK EXCHANGE
Philadelphia Stock Exchange put snapshots on less expensive storage
Tony Catone is quoted in a Forbes article as saying 25% better Storage Utilization, savings of $650,000 over two years
See the VERITAS case study for more information
PROOF FOR HETEROGENEOUS DR
Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta implemented DR with VVR and VCS.
Part of the reason for heterogeneity was a merger between Scottish Rite and Egleston Children’s Medical Center, but they sought a heterogeneous strategy to keep costs down
Tier 1 storage was an HP XP512, Tier 2 storage on the remote site was an IBM FASt700
Mirrored data and replicated data between the two arrays
Servers at both primary and secondary sites included HP-UX, AIX, Solaris and Windows
E-Business strategies estimated: 4 Year ROI estimated at 94% with 194% in year year cost savings of $4.7M. Reduced storage TCO by 53% because they used a hardware independent DR infrastructure.
Also referred to qualitative benefits as: “enhanced patient care and greater flexibility to accommodate changes in business drivers”.
OBJECTION HANDLERS FOR TIERED STORAGE
OBJECTION: The migration cost of bringing in a second tier of storage would erode the cost savings of that second tier (for customers with only one tier today). RESPONSE: At the Weather Channel, they used Storage Foundation for Linux to implement a tiered storage model. They realized $1M cost savings immediately by buying HDS Thunder 9885V instead of another Lightning 9980V; projected savings of $600K in maintenance over the next 3 years. At the same time, they increased the storage per administrator from 2.3TB to 9.6TB.
OBJECTION: If I put a lower fidelity volume (Clariion) under a file system that also holds a higher-fidelity volume, wouldn’t the whole file system crash if I lose the lower-fidelity volume? RESPONSE: If you lose the volume for the second tier, the whole file system would stop until that volume was recovered. However, there are several things that mitigate this risk. First, the file system won’t realize the volume is gone until it attempts to access that volume. Assuming you are placing inactive data on tier 2, that could be a long time. The most common outages we see in SANs are pulled cables and switch power failures; recovery is typically only a minute or two in these situations. It would also be a mistake to assume a lower level of fidelity in tier 2 storage. Most of the mid-range storage is as reliable as tier 1 these days, it just performs a little slower.
OBJECTION HANDLER FOR SNAPSHOTS ON LOWER TIERS
OJECTION: Snapshots on lower tiers would degrade the performance of tier 1 because the write to tier 1 has to also update the tier 2 snapshot (copy-on-write) so it will wait until the tier 2 write returns before returning control to the user or application. RESPONSE: the write to tier 2 will be considered complete when it hits the controller cache. There shouldn’t be a noticeable different in performance of the two controller caches.
7 –

8. Assumptions Hardware cost Server units Software cost (50% discount)
STORAGE
SERVER
Hardware cost
Tier 1 data cost: ~$25/GB1
Tier 2 data cost: ~$7/GB1
Data volume: 10 TB
Data growth: 20% annually
Software cost (75% discount)
TimeFinder: ~$ K2
SRDF/S: ~$125K-$160K2
15% annual maintenance
Storage management labor cost
$150,000 per FTE burdened3
1 FTEs per 10TB3
Server units
3 HP Superdome16s (12 CPU)
2 clustered in prod, 1 in test
Software cost (50% discount)
PowerPath: ~$20K+ $3K/server2
HP MC OE: ~$5K / CPU2
SF Oracle HA: ~$100K+ $22K/server
Assumptions validated for typical size of a large, but not massive ERP implementation, SAP in particular. Validation included customer data points, ERP reference architectures and Symantec consulting
Tier 1 data cost: $25.30 / GB based on Gartner research note from Stan Zaffos January Pricing is projected 2H ’05 cost for EMC DMX3000-M2 with 146GB drives purchased with total frame capacity between 6TB and 12TB.
Tier 2 data cost: $7.40 / GB based on some source. Pricing is projected 2H ’05 cost for EMC CX700 with 146GB drives purchased with total frame capacity between 4TB and 8TB.
TimeFinder and SRDF are shown as a price range because the price increases as data volume increases. We UNDERESTIMATE the true cost by only using the difference between pricing tiers rather than using actual upgrade pricing. Upgrade pricing is more expensive.
Storage software costs, server software costs and discounts from IDC study commissioned by VERITAS in May 2005.
Storage management labor cost from VERITAS customer best practices observed by our ECS Storage Management practice.
Gartner Group Research Note, Jan 2005
IDC study for VERITAS, May 2005
VERITAS Storage Management Consulting
8 –

9. Environment Without VERITAS
Development
Test
Production
ETL
OLAP /
Batch
Reporting
RAID-5
Reporting RAID-5
Reporting RAID-5
OLTP
Mirrored
OLTP
Mirrored
1.2 2 3
9.8 x data set size
Many customers may not have a full copy in their development environment. VALIDATE THE EXISTENCE OF THIS INSTANCE AND ADJUST THE MODEL IF NECESSARY. SEE SECOND SET OF DATA.
Backup
DR RAID-5
Remote Site
9 –

10. Year 1 Cost Without VERITAS
See appendix or workbook for more detail on the source of these numbers
Year 1 is included as an example of an individual year. The next slide summarizes three year savings.
10 –

11. 3 Year Cost Without VERITAS
See appendix for more detail
11 –

12. Environment With VERITAS
Development
Test
Production
ETL
OLAP /
Batch
Reporting
RAID-5
Reporting (Space- Optimized)
Reporting (Space- Optimized)
OLTP
Mirrored
OLTP
Mirrored
Our space-optimized snapshot capability allows us to eliminate two data sets
Eliminate 2 data sets (20%)
9.8
data sets
Backup
Move 3.4 data sets to lower-cost storage (35%)
DR RAID-5
Remote Site
12 –

13. Year 1 Cost With VERITAS
13 –

14. 3 Year Summary Cost With VERITAS
14 –

15. Cost Saving Summary
VERITAS 3 year direct cost savings: $550K
15 –

16. Josh Kahn josh_kahn@Symantec.com (650) 527-1194
Thank You!
Josh Kahn
(650)

17. APPENDIX
Supporting Data

18. 3 Year Cost Without VERITAS
18 –

19. 3 Year Cost With VERITAS
19 –

20. Determining which model to use…
THIS DECK INCLUDES TWO MODULES; CHOOSE ONE MODEL BASED ON THE SITUATION AT YOUR CUSTOMER
Model A is in the presentation by default. Evaluate model B and consider replacing model A with model B.
Use MODEL A when BOTH of the following are TRUE
Reports run from the ERP application are run against a full copy of the OLTP database exclusively for reports (not the OLAP repository).
There are enough server resources to run the reports and OLTP instance on the same server.
Otherwise, use MODEL B
To use the ROI model spreadsheet with MODEL B, update the “data set elimination value” to 0%, update the “movement to a lower tier” value to 45%, and reduce the total data volume to 8TB
20 –

21. MODEL B

22. Assumptions Hardware cost Server units Software cost (50% discount)
STORAGE
SERVER
Hardware cost
Tier 1 data cost: ~$25/GB1
Tier 2 data cost: ~$7/GB1
Data volume: 10 TB
Data growth: 20% annually
Software cost (75% discount)
TimeFinder: ~$ K2
SRDF/S: ~$125K-$160K2
15% annual maintenance
Storage management labor cost
$150,000 per FTE burdened3
1 FTEs per 10TB3
Server units
3 HP Superdome16s (12 CPU)
2 clustered in prod, 1 in test
Software cost (50% discount)
PowerPath: ~$20K+ $3K/server2
HP MC OE: ~$5K/CPU2
SF Oracle HA: ~$100K+ $22K/server
Assumptions validated for typical size of a large, but not massive ERP implementation, SAP in particular. Validation included customer data points, ERP reference architectures and Symantec consulting
Tier 1 data cost: $25.30 / GB based on Gartner research note from Stan Zaffos January Pricing is projected 2H ’05 cost for EMC DMX3000-M2 with 146GB drives purchased with total frame capacity between 6TB and 12TB.
Tier 2 data cost: $7.40 / GB based on some source. Pricing is projected 2H ’05 cost for EMC CX700 with 146GB drives purchased with total frame capacity between 4TB and 8TB.
TimeFinder and SRDF are shown as a price range because the price increases as data volume increases. We UNDERESTIMATE the true cost by only using the difference between pricing tiers rather than using actual upgrade pricing. Upgrade pricing is more expensive.
Storage software costs, server software costs and discounts from IDC study commissioned by VERITAS in May 2005.
Storage management labor cost from VERITAS customer best practices observed by our ECS Storage Management practice.
Gartner Group Research Note, Jan 2005
IDC study for VERITAS, May 2005
VERITAS Storage Management Consulting
22 –

23. Environment Without VERITAS
Development
Test
Production
ETL
OLAP /
Batch
Reporting
RAID-5
OLTP
Mirrored
OLTP
Mirrored
Many customers may not have a full copy in their development environment.
1.2 2 3
Backup
DR RAID-5
7.4 x data set size
Remote Site
23 –

24. Year 1 Cost Without VERITAS
24 –

25. 3 Year Cost Without VERITAS
25 –

26. Environment With VERITAS
Development
Test
Production
ETL
OLAP /
Batch
Reporting
RAID-5
OLTP
Mirrored
OLTP
Mirrored
7.4
data sets
Move 3.4 data sets to lower-cost storage (45%)
Backup
DR RAID-5
Remote Site
26 –

27. Year 1 Cost With VERITAS
27 –

28. 3 Year Summary Cost With VERITAS
28 –

29. Cost Saving Summary
VERITAS 3 year direct cost savings: $345K
29 –

30. APPENDIX
Supporting Data

31. 3 Year Cost Without VERITAS
31 –

32. 3 Year Cost With VERITAS
32 –