| Information Lifecycle Management Vs Integrated Data Lifecycle Management |
|
|
| In: Asian Channels August 2006 | |
| Written by Shanti Anne Morais | |
|
Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) has been around for sometime now - it was one of the buzzwords of 2003, but somehow, its perceived complexity still has many IT professionals and business executives scratching their heads over it. Its definition alone for a long time resulted in many heated discussions and also caused a lot of confusion amongst its users or would-be users. In 2004, the Storage Networking Industry Association (SNIA) attempted to address this issue by assigning a new definition to the technology:Information Lifecycle Management, the Association said, is comprised of the policies, processes, practices and tools used to align the business value of information with the most appropriate and cost effective IT infrastructure from the time information is conceived through its final disposition. Information is aligned with business processes through management policies and service levels associated with applications, metadata, information, and data. Let’s simplify it - basically, ILM is the practice of applying certain policies to the effective management of information throughout its useful life. It includes every phase of a “record” from its beginning to its end. Furthermore, while it is generally applied to information that rises to the classic definition of a record, it applies to any and all informational assets. What this means is that during its existence, information can become a record by being identified as documenting a business transaction or as satisfying a business need.ILM classifies information at the information level (for example – records, messages and files) and then processes this information according to metadata policies established around these information structures. ILM was originally developed to meet document control and compliance requirements, however over the past few years, many traditional storage vendors have co-opted ILM as a strategy for cost optimizing storage environments. In the case of storage vendors, original functionality is extended to data movement between tiers of storage devices in accordance with established metadata policies. What these vendors are doing is promising ILM as a precise and accurate method of cost-optimizing data over the entire data lifecycle. ILM is a logical response for applications where document control and compliance are required.While many vendors are working on delivering on this strategy, it must be noted that some in the industry feel that ILM was never meant as a means for cost optimizing storage environments. There are costs and complexities involved when implementing ILM for storage cost optimization, and it is important to sum up these costs and services available as well as clearly understand the incremental management layers required for data classification and movement. ILM requires multiple storage platforms, new processes, and application-specific software for classifying, moving and storing data throughout its lifecycle. ILM requires data classification: a complete information life-cycle management strategy should include integrated automation, policy creation, discovery, and data classification. The good news is that there is no shortage of professional services available to help users implement ILM. The bad news is that for organizations aiming to reduce their costs of storage, ILM may not always be the best answer. "While many IT professionals are seeking to cost-optimize their storage environment, some strategies surrounding ILM lead to more complexity," says Dave Reinsel, IDC director of storage research.However, ILM is also not the only answer. Enter Data Lifecycle Management (iDLM)The alternative approach is called integrated Data Lifecycle Management (iDLM). Unlike ILM, it is said that iDLM was designed specifically to cost optimize storage environments. Just what is iDLM? In its broadest sense, it has been defined as the process of managing business data throughout its lifecycle from conception until disposal across different storage media, within the constraints of the business process. Its supporters say that an iDLM strategy delivers immediate ROI through the easy implementation and management of tiered storage. In addition, the storage infrastructure capable of supporting integrated DLM can also support ILM if and when needed.iDLM’s approach is based on a consolidated storage infrastructure, therefore, it can enable organizations to utilize common data management and administration tools across and between all service level tiers of storage. Determining your organization’s needsSo the question now is: which is right for your organization’s needs? The amount of data, its projected growth and lifecycle with regards to each application, and the required storage quality of service levels all have to be taken into account. Other important questions to ask include what document control and compliance requirements have to be considered, how will data movement be handled, and if and what additional investments may be required.Do your groundwork carefully before deciding to go for either ILM or iDLM. The hardest challenge in deploying both ILM and iDLM is identifying the value of data in a way that aligns with the business. Tools are required to automate the process of classifying and prioritizing data, whether it is at the file system, data management, or application level. Administrators also need automated tools to move data between storage tiers and place data on the most appropriate storage resources according to its value and life cycle, while maintaining transparent end-user data access. Basically, what IT managers want is an integrated data management system that is data value-aware, works seamlessly with existing storage, backup-and-recovery processes, provides policy automation, and provides continuous feedback to administrators for assessing status and maintaining an audit trail. And as always, there is that cost-effectiveness issue. ◊ |
|
