Industry Research Reports and Market Analysis at MindBranch.com
  

ILM and Data Classification

Product Type: Market Research Report
Published by: Peripheral Concepts, Inc.
Published: February 2007
Product Code: R3428-1
Description
This study discusses the results of a survey on Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) that was completed in November 2006. Though there is still some confusion as to what ILM really encompasses, most of its components are being implemented at small and medium sites, many of which have identified specific budgets to achieve an ILM ultimate result. Greater emphasis on security, compliance and recovery performance stand out as the major reasons for the increased attention given to ILM, data classification and tiered storage

The survey reveals that SMBs dedicate up to X% of their IT budget to deploy or improve upon an Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) process, viewing it as a solution to major deficiencies in their IT operation.

ILM is an approach to managing the flow of an information system's data and associated metadata from creation to deletion. ILM is a deployment process that usually encompasses the following key steps:
  • Classify or categorize data
  • Relate business rules to data classes
  • Determine service levels
  • Determine security levels
  • Establish tiered storage architecture
  • Choose appropriate storage hardware
  • Choose appropriate storage software, including management tools and infrastructure
When asked to what extent they have achieved each step, only x% of the respondents believe having attained full implementation, with scoring highest, and lagging behind

Data Classification

Much of the need for classification is driven by the consolidation of previously scattered data from various sources. This stresses the issue that data varies in its importance, accessibility requirements, and value.

The median population has identified four levels of classification, while about % of the population shows over levels. Though the ability to classify older data is important, it is rated much lower than, which is ranked at the top of the classifying parameters. Data classification is applied in priority.

25% of the population rates data classification very or extremely important in its potential to solve one of their major problems. Faster retrieval is cited as the most important reason one would want to classify data.

Automated Tiered storage

The biggest challenge users face when they are beginning to implement ILM-based tiered storage is agreeing on the information and data classification requirements. x% of the screening population and x% of the selected population say they have implemented it, and x% plan to implement it in the next two years.

Compliance with regulations is the major reason for implementing Tiered storage, and is the most wanted service combined with a Tiered Storage offering Most popular Tiered storage vendors. Six other vendors share the bulk of the rest of the market.

Other parameters analyzed for each of ILM, Data classification, and Tiered Storage include expected or achieved benefits, product selection criteria, most wanted associated services and preferred vendors.

This survey addressed a random population of 35,000 sites. Over 4,000 reliable responses form the basis of preliminary findings covering storage configurations and implementation plans. For a selected population of over 110 IT sites, mostly SMBs, this report provides statistics on practices, ranks issues and needs, and analyzes trends and plans.
Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1- PROFILES - Site Profiles

Storage Profiles

2- MANAGEMENT

Storage Management

Budgets and VARs

3- ILM

4- DATA CLASSIFICATION

5- TIERED STORAGE

6- SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

7- AUTHOR’S PROFILE

8- OTHER PERIPHERAL CONCEPTS’ REPORTS




LIST OF FIGURES




0- Executive Summary

0.1. QS2. Company Annual Revenue
0.2. QS2. Company Revenue Selected Population for Full Survey
0.3. QS9a. Total Raw Disk Capacity in the company Screening Survey- Answers with an Opinion Only
0.4. Q4a. Disk Capacity Full Survey- All Answers
0.5. QS3. Number of Employees All Respondents- Screening Survey
0.6. 2007- Number of Company Employees vs Disk Capacity
0.7. QS4. Respondent Distribution by Industry Total Population -Screener
0.8. 2007- Industry versus Disk Capacity Screening Survey
0.9. Q13. What is your total yearly IT budget for the company?
0.10. Q10. Priorities in dealing With Storage
0.11. 2007- Information Lifecycle Management (ILM)
0.12. Q12d. ILM Plans By Disk Capacity Range Screening Survey - Respondents with an opinion
0.13. 2007- ILM steps -Level of achievement
0.14. Percent of IT budget dedicated to ILM versus Levels of Corporate IT budgets
0.15. 2007- Reasons for Implementing ILM
0.16. 2007- Services Combined with an ILM Offering Respondents with an opinion only
0.17. 2007- Rating ILM Features Respondents with an opinion only
0.18. 2007- ILM Vendors Respondents with an opinion only
0.19. 2007- Data Classification status and plan Screening Survey
0.20. QS12b. Data Classification Status and Plans Screener - Answers with an Opinion Only
0.21. 2007 - How many Classification levels have you identified?
0.22. 2007- What Applications do you Classify? Respondents with an opinion only
0.23. 2007- Important Factors in Classifying Data Respondents with an opinion only
0.24. 2007- Rating Data Classification Features Respondents with an opinion only
0.25. 2007- Data Classification Vendors Respondents with an opinion only
0.26. 2007- Automated Tiered Storage
0.27. Q12a. Tiered Storage Status and Plans Answers with an Opinion Only
0.28. Tiered Storage- Reasons for Implementation Respondents with an opinion only
0.29. 2007- Services Offered with Tiered Storage Respondents with an opinion only
0.30. 2007- Tiered Storage Vendors
1- PROFILES
1.1. SITE PROFILES
1.2. QS2. Company Annual Revenue

1.3. QS2. Company Revenue Selected Population for Full Survey

1.4. QS3. Number of Employees All Respondents- Screening Survey

1.5. QS3. Number of Employees Selected Population

1.6. QS4. Respondent Distribution by Industry Total Population -Screener

1.7. QS4. Respondent Distribution by Industry Selected Population

1.8. QS1. Areas of Responsibility All Screening Respondents

1.9. QS1. Areas of Responsibility Selected Population

1.10. QS5. Total Number of Servers Selected Population

1.11. QS6. Total Number of Workstations Selected Population

1.12. QS5. How many servers of each type does your company have?

1.13. QS6. How many servers From each Vendor does your company have?Screening Survey

1.14. QS6. How many servers From each Vendor does your company have? Selected Population

1.15. Storage profiles

1.16. QS9a. Total Raw Disk Capacity in the company Screening Survey- Answers with an Opinion Only

1.17. Q4a. Disk Capacity Full Survey- Excludes Don’t Know

1.18. Q5a. Annual Growth Rate of Disk Capacity

1.19. Q3a. Number of Employees vs Disk Capacity

1.20. QS4. Industry versus Disk Capacity Screening Survey

1.21. Q8. Type of storage arrays (or vendor) used

1.22. QS10. Disk Connection to Various Operating Systems Respondents With an Opinion only

1.23. QS10. Disk Connection to Windows Respondents With an Opinion only

1.24. QS10. Disk Connection to Linux Respondents With an Opinion only

1.25. QS10. Disk Connection to UNIX Respondents With an Opinion only

1.26. QS10. Disk Connection to Proprietary OS Respondents With an Opinion only

1.27. QS10. Disk Connection to Mainframes Respondents With an Opinion only

2- MANAGEMENT
2.1. Storage Management Issues
2.2. Q10. Priorities in dealing With Storage

2.3. Q10. Priorities in dealing With Storage Tiers 3 Sites with Disk Capacity 51-200 TB

2.4. 2006 Report Screener Survey, What are the Key Challenges in Managing your Storage Environment?

2.5. Q11. Problem Areas in dealing With Storage

2.6. Q11. Problem Areas in dealing With Storage

2.7. Q11. Problem Areas - Security By capacity Tiers

2.8. Q12. Are you experiencing performance bottlenecks?

2.9. Q12. Are you experiencing performance bottlenecks? By capacity Tiers

2.10. Budgets, VARs

2.11. Q13. What is your total yearly IT budget for the company?

2.12. Q99. What percent of you IT budget have you dedicated to ILM?

2.13. Q99. Percent of IT budget dedicated to ILM/HSM versus Total Budget

2.14. Q15 What Percent of Deployment of Storage is Done by

2.15. Q15 What Percent of Deployment of Storage is Done by the Vendor

2.16. Q15 What Percent of Deployment of Storage is Done by VARs

2.17. Q16. At What Level of Management is the Decision Made for Purchasing

3.1. ILM

3.2. QS12c. ILM Status and Plans Screening Survey- All Respondents

3.3. QS12c. ILM Status and Plans Screening Survey- Respondents With an Opinion only

3.4. QS12c. ILM Plans By Corporate Disk Capacity Range

3.5. QS12c. ILM Plans by Department Capacity Ranges All Respondents

3.6. QS12d. ILM Plans By Disk Capacity Range Screening Survey - Respondents with an opinion

3.7. QS12c. ILM Plans by Number of Employees

3.8. QS12c. ILM Plans by Number of Employees Without Respondents who don’t know what it is

3.9. QS12c. ILM Plans by Number of Servers

3.10. Q95. ILM steps - Level of achievement

3.11. Q96. ILM Implementation status and plan Full Survey - Answers with an opinion only

3.12. Q13c. Rate the Importance of ILM Screening Survey

3.13. Q13c. Rate the Importance of ILM Screening Survey- By capacity Range

3.14. Q98. For what percent of your data do you, or will you have ILM?

3.15. Q99. What percent of you IT budget have you dedicated to ILM?

3.16. Q100. Criteria/Reasons in Selecting ILM

3.17. Q97. Why not implement ILM?

3.18. Q101. Rating ILM Features Respondents with an opinion only

3.19. Q102 Services Combined with an ILM Offering Respondents with an opinion only

3.20. Q103. ILM Vendors Respondents with an opinion only

3.21. Q103 ILM Vendors Responses exclude IBM. HP, EMC and Symantec

4.1. 4- DATA CLASSIFICATION
4.2. QS12b. Data Classification status and plan Screening Survey
4.3. QS12b. Data Classification Status and Plans Screener - Answers with an Opinion Only

4.4. QS12b. Data Classification Plans by Department Capacity Ranges All Respondents

4.5. QS12b. Data Classification Plans by Department Capacity Ranges Respondents With an Opinion Only

4.6. Q107. Rate the Importance of Data Classification

4.7. Q13b. Rate the Importance of Data Classification Screening Survey- By capacity Range

4.8. Q105. For what percent of your data do you have Data Classification?

4.9. Q106. What percent of you IT budget have you dedicated to Data Classification in 2006

4.10. Q106. What percent of you IT budget will you dedicate to Data Classification?

4.11. Q108. Reasons for Implementing Data Classification Respondents with an opinion only

4.12. Q109 How many Classification levels have you identified?

4.13. Q110. Important Factors/Reasons for Classifying Data Respondents with an opinion only

4.14. Q113. Rating Data Classification Features Respondents with an opinion only

4.15. Q112. What Applications do you Classify? Respondents with an opinion only

4.16. Q114. What Classification Solution? Respondents with an opinion only

4.17. Q116. Data Classification Vendors Respondents with an opinion only

4.18. Q116. Data Classification Vendors Without IBM, HP, EMC and NetApp

5.1. AUTOMATED TIERED STORAGE
5.2. Q12a. Tiered Storage Status and Plans
5.3. Q12a. Tiered Storage Status and Plans Answers with an Opinion Only

5.4. QS12a. Tiered storage Plans by Department Capacity Ranges All Respondents

5.5. QS12a. Tiered storage Plans by Department Capacity Ranges Respondents with an opinion only

5.6. QS13a. Rate the Importance of Automated Tiered Storage Screening Survey

5.7. Q120. Factors Influencing Tiered Storage Choice Respondents with an opinion only

5.8. Q121. Services Offered with Tiered Storage Respondents with an opinion only

5.9. Q122. Tiered Storage Vendors

5.10. Q122. Tiered Storage Vendors Without IBM, HP, EMC and NetApp

Ordering and More Information
Price and Delivery Options


MindBranch has been the leading provider of industry and investment research from more than 550 independent research firms since 1992. With over 90,000 market research reports, MindBranch is your trusted source of competitive business intelligence.