To start with

  • Disclaimer
    The opinions expressed here are my personal opinions. Content published here is not read or approved in advance by EMC and does not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of EMC. This is my blog, it is not an EMC blog.

Pages of note

Storagezilla’s blog

« RecoverPoint 3.0 | Main | New NetApp not so new. »

March 12, 2008

Got Storage? HDS doesn't!

Seen in my inbox earlier today.

----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to ukspkmx04.hds.com.:
>>> MAIL From:nameremoved
<<< 452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space; try again later
<nameremoved@hds.com>... Deferred: 452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space; try again later
Warning: message still undelivered after 2 hours
Will keep trying until message is 2 days old

(Before we begin it should be noted that I'm so embarrassed for you right now.)

My friends lets try and figure out why HDS just don't have the disk space. Is it..

A: HDS's ugly baby thin provisioning implementation is so awkward to configure that even HDS can't get it right?

B: HCAP. Not so good for email archiving. Or archiving. Or anything.

C: UVM is doing what UVM is good at. Falling over when you need it to be up and running.

D: In an effort to go green the LUNs providing storage to the mail servers are Hitachi Power Savings enabled. Now that they're offline they aren't going to spin up anytime soon. Or ever. 

Though it could it be..

E: They're waiting for Flash Drives to become available for the USP.

Hitachi IT staff. It looks like your current storage vendor isn't meeting the challenges of your business and as such it's not wrong to consider switching. 

Don't wait for this to happen again call one of these numbers and we'll get through this together.

Kidding aside, it goes to show that we all have IT issues at some stage. Some are just funnier than others. ;)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834519dbf69e200e550ffb82d8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Got Storage? HDS doesn't!:

Comments