This blog post summarizes the issue for today's Peer Incite and provides some additional background material for the session:

Background Material

Here are the key graphics we'll discuss today:

Figure 1 – A Model of a Storage Services Architecture

• Data accounts for capex as costs depreciated over a 48-month period or lease costs.
• In no instance is Oracle DAS less expensive than SAN due to Oracle’s license fees at $20K - $30K per server.
• SANs of 20TB and under assume iSCSI SAN.
• Larger SANs use EMC CX (100/200 TB) and V-Max (500/1200 TB).
• Includes incremental server and software license costs to accommodate increased compute requirements.
• SAN is a fungible asset that can be shared across the application portfolio

• At 200TBs, a One-off model is 15% more expensive than a storage services approach
• The efficiency improvements from a storage services model at 20TB and up range from 8-23% relative to a One-off approach
• The ability to share resources across the application portfolio is the key enabler.

Action Item:

Footnotes:

• Infrastrucutre Wars
• How Google Apps Threatens Microsoft
• Should Exchange 2010 use DAS or SAN
• Should Storage Services Reside in Arrays or Application Stacks
• A Storage Services Approach will Streamline Infrastructure Delivery
• Comparing Return on Assets (ROA) to Return on Investment (ROI)