Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Storage hypervisor

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Software-defined storage. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Storage hypervisor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Term "storage hypervisor" is clearly invented and not used by anybody else. Every single citation source is a link to a PR site, company own site or paid TechTarget resource will be posting anything they are paid to post. There's no way to improve the article because no independent sources found. Industry doesn't use "storage hypervisor" term either. NISMO1968 (talk) 12:14, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 March 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The term has been used to describe products by at least three companies: Compellent Technologies(http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/368886/compellent_adds_virtualization_hardware_upgrades_its_san/), IBM(https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_pbABgAAQBAJ&pg=PA28) and Virsto(http://www.zdnet.com/article/virsto-launches-storage-hypervisor-for-vsphere-1-5/). Peter James (talk) 13:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC) (edited: 14:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC))[reply]

• MERGE ...with Software Defined Storage. Virsto is defunct company acquired by VMware and product discontinued. Compellent acquired by Dell and wording used no more. IBM kind of started to push "Storage hypervisor is a rapidly emerging way of describing the same value points in..."^[1] but "rapidly" did not bring in anybody since 2014. APS (Full Auto) (talk) 14:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The deletion rationale was that it was "clearly invented and not used by anybody else". It has been used, and whether it is still used is not relevant, unless it has been replaced by a new term and can be redirected to it. Peter James (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Cannot comment on "clearly invented" but I guess Software Defined Storage is what's used to describe this technology now. "A storage hypervisor is software that allows storage to be controlled centrally in a storage pool regardless of what hardware the storage is located on."^[2]. "Software-defined storage (SDS) is an approach to data storage in which the programming that controls storage-related tasks is decoupled from the physical storage hardware."^[3]. Definitions come from TechTarget I personally hate. Either way "storage hypervisor" and "software-defined storage" describe same thing. IMHO. I'd do a redirection from "Storage hypervisor" -> "Software-defined Storage" instead of just deleting "Storage hypervisor" because second has 100x more hits in Google alone. I don't like the idea of keeping "Storage hypervisor" article AS IS just because it's very confusing in what ordinary "hypervisor" actually is. Again, IMHO. APS (Full Auto) (talk) 15:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Software-defined storage is the concept; storage hypervisor seems to be the software. Peter James (talk) 16:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• There are numerous names but most companies including VMware and DataCore alone call it "Virtual SAN" now.^[4] It turns out "Storage hypervisor" is abandoned. APS (Full Auto) (talk) 17:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Peter James (talk) 13:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment found one article on Google Scholar which mentions this, albeit only in passing: Snyder, Brett; Ringenberg, Jordan; Green, Robert; Devabhaktuni, Vijay; Alam, Mansoor (2015). "Evaluation and design of highly reliable and highly utilized cloud computing systems". Journal of Cloud Computing. 4 (1). doi:10.1186/s13677-015-0036-6. ISSN 2192-113X. – "Similarly, a storage hypervisor can be used to manage virtualized storage resources to increase utilization rates of disk while maintaining high reliability." (p. 12); "Based on the insights garnered during this study, future work may include the following: ... Evaluating implications of server and storage hypervisors on the reliability of a CCS instead of using a simple resources requested vs. available scheme" (p. 14) SJK (talk) 09:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• If it's going to be kept it should be made vendor neutral. At least links to company sites removed because now it's a link farm: vendor pages, dead links (Virsto), and PR articles (ESG and TechTarget). If article will be kept I can try to re-write it / modify. Let me know what you think. Thanks! APS (Full Auto) (talk) 19:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment OK so I've removed a) links to vendor pages used for citation, b) dead links (parked domains, redirects etc), and c) ones with a clear COI. I've also included all the links and quotes and citations from this up-to-date "Talk" page. Does "Storage hypervisor" look better now? APS (Full Auto) (talk) 07:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/merge: It looks better than it did, but I'm voting for a delete/merge as suggested above. There's not a whole lot of useful content, but perhaps some is salvageable in that context. Chrisw80 (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as I've been watching this AfD and this seems best, no serious needs for deletion perhaps. SwisterTwister talk 06:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.