The concept of datacenters running solely on flash storage has been a topic of discussion for over a decade. Some IT teams have embraced flash storage, replacing conventional hard disk drives (HDDs) and other storage media, while others have taken a hybrid approach. Despite the growing popularity of enterprise-grade flash storage, there is still a significant demand for HDDs, particularly in industries such as media and hyperscale cloud providers. An all-flash datacenter replaces all HDDs with flash media, such as solid-state drives or nonvolatile memory express (NVMe) media. However, there is a debate within the industry about whether “all flash” refers to primary storage only or includes backups and archives as well.
Pure Storage, a pioneer in all-flash arrays, introduced the idea of an all-flash datacenter in 2011. Adoption has been gradual, with companies initially using flash for primary datasets and online data. However, flash can now compete with HDDs in terms of price. The transition from single-level cell (SLC) flash to quad-level cell (QLC) flash has made flash storage more affordable and capable of higher capacity. As a result, all-flash arrays are now available in mid-range and entry-level storage systems. Despite these advancements, there are still areas of IT that prefer HDDs.
The initial appeal of flash storage was its speed, particularly for random reads and writes. However, HDD arrays with flash-based caching can achieve similar speeds for sequential read/write operations. The choice between flash and HDD depends on specific storage needs, including performance, capacity, and cost. According to industry experts, all-flash datacenters may not become commonplace due to the varying demands of different workloads. Additionally, the flash industry would need to significantly increase capacity to replace the majority of online media currently stored on HDDs.
Analysts predict that flash capacity will eventually surpass that of HDDs. The decreasing cost of flash storage brings advantages such as lower maintenance and reduced power consumption. As flash becomes more affordable, it becomes viable for workloads that didn’t initially require the performance benefits of flash. However, flash storage is not considered a universal solution for all data storage needs. Certain regulations, the need for large datasets in AI, and the requirement for immutable data copies suggest the need for alternative storage options such as HDDs, tape, or optical storage.
To bridge the cost gap, flash suppliers have implemented techniques like deduplication and compression. However, these techniques are less effective on already highly optimized or compressed data. As a result, many IT teams and suppliers are diversifying their storage options. Some recommend using high-density SSDs for latency-sensitive, read-intensive workloads, while others believe QLC flash is not suitable for most workloads. Overall, flash storage continues to evolve and compete with HDDs, but alternative storage options still have their place in the datacenter landscape.
