Skip to main content

EMC's Cloudware: Maui erupts with Atmos

Chris is also brandishing a Atmos GUI management interface but I'll wait for a better screenshot. I snatched a better one from StorageZilla:



Maui is policy-driven software for placing and protecting data objects. The product is simple in conception and aimed at providing vast petabyte levels of storage for cloud storage and service providers, web 2.0 companies and others needing to have a globally distributed storage resource without the complexity, EMC says, of today's SANs and NAS systems. There is no RAID, only objects and copies of objects and metadata stored on Hulk (Infiniflex 10000) arrays which have highly intelligent X86 controllers running the Atmos software and looking after dumb SATA JBODS (Just a Bunch Of Disks) connected via SAS links.

Atmos stores unstructured information as objects in a global object namespace, and can scale to store billions of them in a multiple petabyte infrastructure. It has a high degree of self-management through settable policies describing how objects should be stored, meaning the number of copies, their placement and their longevity.



El Reg reporting
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more