- Transforming ITIL to Agile
- Visualization Coolness
- Change Detection
- Green IT Machine
- Continuous Training
- Community and Cooperation are the Keys to Success!
- Ignoring the source code is akin to an ostrich sticking its head in the sand
- Remember when men were men and wrote their own device drivers?
- My downloads is bigger than yours!
- It's all about working together
February 17, 2006 | Comments: (0)
Higher Availability Future: Autonomic Computing or Recovery Oriented Computing?
It is fascinating to me that so many smart people can disagree on the best future approach to higher availability infrastructure. The
autonomic computing crowd led by IBM is touting self-healing and self-regulating computing systems. On the other hand the recovery oriented computing (ROC) folks led by researchers at Berkeley and Stanford declare failures are inevitable. ROC proposes the key to higher availability is helping humans to recover infrastructure from failures faster.
I have written here previously about ROC, but its time to start a dialog on comparing and contrasting these two radically differing views on the future of better infrastructure availability.
You notice I am talking about infrastructure availability not individual system availability. As an industry we have focused for decades on building more reliable individual components and systems. But now the reliability problem has moved to a different level. Take all these highly reliable components and systems and put them together with software developed by multiple vendors or adopted from different open source projects and the reality of complex systems settles in.
Can we build autonomic computing infrastructure that is self-healing and self-regulating beyond simple problems and single systems? Or will humans always be an important part of repairing and recovering IT infrastructure?
Our friends from Berkeley and Stanford offer an interesting perspective dubbed the Ironies of Automation. Their argument goes something like this.
Automation does not remove human influence, but instead reduces IT personnel understanding and can actually make their job harder. Automation increases complexity, reduces visibility and provides no day-to-day interaction and learning. ROC argues for better tools to help, not replace people.
So what do you think? Autonomic Computing or Recovery Oriented Computing? Which will lead us to higher availability infrastructure? Send me your vote to thebaum@splunk.com,
Posted by Michael Baum on February 17, 2006 11:33 PM
RATE THIS ARTICLE:
-

- COMMENTS
I don't think it's a case of one or the other. For example, the fingerprint technology the UC Berkeley RADLab project discusses and similar technology implemented in Integrien's Alive solution can enlighten post-mortem recovery processes while also providing predictive capability to catch and help prevent problem recurrence. This kind of pragmatic approach also feeds the recovery expertise of IT staff into predictive mechanisms so the problem about to occur is identified with recovery guidance attached. A human element is involved, but the result is to prevent rather than recover.
Posted by: Kevin Strehlo at March 2, 2006 07:26 AMTOP STORIES
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

- Virtualization: A Step by Step Approach to Success
- Dialing up Agility with Business Transformation
- 5 Things You Need to Know About Storage Virtualization

- Is your smaller organization ready for High Availability?
- Is system maintenance doing more harm than good?
- Virtual Test Lab Automation: Manage development infrastructure





