We think the case can be made that centralized, large storage for
research needs would be a strategic investment for the University.
This is part of the reason for the survey of users. I'm sure many
other realize this but I suspect no har number numbers are available.
We also realize that what ETS provides is very top notch. When I think
of ETS storage I think of payroll and human resources. It cannot go
down, ever. We may not need quite as much gold plating for research
data storage, and thus it might be less expensive if separated from
administrative needs.
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Jarlath O'Neil-Dunne
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am going to very quickly spiral downward to the land of complaint, but what drives me crazy, is that with all the overhead we pay on grants we still have to dish out mega-bucks for storage. As far as I can tell the hundreds of thousands in overhead I have paid gets me a shared office (I bought the furniture) and internet access.
> --
> Jarlath O'Neil-Dunne
> University of Vermont
> Spatial Analysis Laboratory
> 802.656.3324
> Web site: www.uvm.edu/~joneildu
> Blog: http://letters-sal.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 22, 2011, at 2:33 PM, James Vincent wrote:
>
>> That thought had crossed our minds many times. We thought it was
>> always very odd that during our talks with ETS (involving large
>> storage requests) no other people or groups were ever mentioned as
>> having the same problem.
>>
>> I think what we need at UVM is Research Technology Services, a group
>> that can provide what ETS provides but for research groups.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Jarlath O'Neil-Dunne
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Maybe us LDUGs should band together for storage?
>>> --
>>> Jarlath O'Neil-Dunne
>>> Sent from my tablet
>>>
>>> James Vincent <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We had considered ETS but decided to build our own. While ETS has the
>>>> technical experience and infrastructure capacity it seemed to me they
>>>> were not in the business of providing large storage. They have jobs -
>>>> they are all very busy. It is sometimes difficult to get anything out
>>>> of ETS.
>>>>
>>>> So, we decided to build our own. We have 50TB in place now and
>>>> capacity for about ~200TB (raw).
>>>>
>>>> We will still work with ETS to place it out at Tech Park. We will also
>>>> depend on ETS for tape backup. This also seems difficult.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Jarlath ONeil-Dunne
>>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>> After decades of maintaining our own servers and managing our own storage we
>>>>> are moving to an ETS managed configuration in June. We feel that this will
>>>>> allow us to focus on what we do best (spatial analysis) and let ETS do what
>>>>> it does best (manage data and backup systems). Anyone else considering a
>>>>> similar move?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jarlath
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
