1. The Campus Data Storage & Services Task Force: Key Findings & Recommendations Michael Grady, Office of the CIO Beth Sandore Namachchivaya, Library University of Illinios at Urbana-Champaign https://wiki.cites.uiuc.edu/wiki/ display/DSST/

2. Charge Objective: help the campus develop a strategy around storage “develop a comprehensive strategic plan for addressing the central data storage needs of this campus, including specific operational ideas for implementation”

3. Time Line August – December 2011: Survey, info. gathering, meetings, brainstorming, working groups, input from multiple constituencies January-February 2012: Working group reports, mini-retreat, final report March 9, 2012: final report submitted

4. Task Force Activities Conduct & analyze campus baseline survey Develop common agenda Environmental scan: peer institutions Collect & analyze use cases Prioritize key needs & issues

6. Analyzed Storage Needs For: Enterprise storage & services Web storage and services at the unit level Individual student/staff/faculty Research data (incl. services) Institutional/administrative Long-term preservation and curation Instructional needs

7. Data Storage Task Force: Storage Survey Findings 7 PB of storage across 50 data centers 9 units support 90% of storage; heavy focus on research Inconsistent sensitive data services Few data replication services Backup services inconsistent “Every tub on own bottom” = ineffective use of finite technical expertise Brittle purchase and refresh cycles

8. Units With Significant Storage

9. Remaining Storage Distribution

10. Survey: Unmet Needs Capacity, accelerated need for growth Sensitive data support for research & administrative data Affordable backup, archiving, and timely data recovery Easy sharing and collaboration with data on campus & off Remote accessibility Cloud storage—elastic expansion

11. Survey: Obstacles Funding: lack of recurring funds Staffing: insufficient staff expertise Existing services too complicated Education about what is available, and how to use it

12. Storage & Research Lifecycle Manage sensitive data!!! Long-term (5 years +) managed storage for high capacity datasets; Ease of use—move data from HPC to easily-identified storage environments suited to the data needs Create and manage pools of storage across and among campus units; Collaboration tools to enable sharing of research data among individuals/groups Storage-related services: –Tiered storage to support sensitive data (HIPAA, classified data, etc.), high and low availability; –Backup, replication, and archiving per requirements –Research data consulting services, incl. data management planning, database design, curation, migration, and preservation; –Data archiving

13. Analysis: Urbana Campus NSF Data Management Plans 341 proposals with DMPs (updates and supplements not included) 43 proposals used Grainger Engineering Library template and mention assistance from Grainger Library in their proposal (12.61%) 57 proposals identified IDEALS IR as a location where data will be deposited (includes the 43 from above) (16.72%) 52 proposals used the single sentence "See GPG Chapter II.C.2.j for guidance on contents" for their DMP (15.25%) Compiled by William Mischo and Mary Schlembach

14. NSF DMP Data Storage: UIUC RAIDs work or lab computers research group servers external hard drives no storage format provided (2 cases) outside repository “Unique storage solutions” NCSA data test bed custom built processor research group cluster Compiled by William Mischo and Mary Schlembach

15. Workplace Productivity, Instruction, and Institutional Assets Easy to manage, easy to federate Central support for file-system storage and services Central support for database content and access services (incl. virtualization) Central multimedia storage LMS content storage and access Preservation storage: file system and block level

16. Sensitive Data, Security, and Privacy Potential campus exposure from non- secure clinical research data storage Potential exposure from non-secure use of student, HR, and other administrative data Not every unit can manage sensitive data adequately—risk of exposure multiplies Need policies and best practices around research compliance and administrative practice

17. Storage Architecture, Technology, Delivery, and Cost Models Peers have more robust central storage infrastructure Cost efficiencies Staff efficiencies Advantages of late entry to this area Need network and storage architecture work

18. Storage Architecture

19. Current Decentralized Storage Predicated on “just in case” needs Non-recurring funding Significant staff investment within units Over-priced, obsolete storage Locks units into inflexible solutions

20. Benefits of Centralized Storage Supports “just in time” allocation Easy access to unallocated storage Consistent support for HPC storage Requires fewer central staff to manage Edge IT Pro’s can focus on edge technologies

21. Recommendations: Strategy Campus Storage Management Governance Share Storage Resources Provide Centrally Managed Storage Provide Storage Management Services Incorporate Cloud Services Provide Best Practices and Policies Adopt “evergreen” approach to storage refresh

22. Recommendations: Actions, time frames, responsible parties…

23. Rec’s #1

24. Rec’s #2

25. Key Takeaways Need a “storage evolution” campus-wide Ensure culture of excellence while shifting infrastructure focus to middle Govern & provision based on user needs Enable provision of domain-specific edge technologies Risk too great to not take action

27. Synergistic Work: 2010-12 Urbana Campus Data Center Consolidation –Reduce small data center footprint across campus –Support research computing cluster https://campuscluster.illinois.edu/ NSF Data Management plan requirement: 1/2011 Data Stewardship Committee –Focus on research data needs & policy CIO Cyberinfrastructure planning IT governance

28. Task Force & Working Groups: Mike Grady, Office of the CIO ; co-chair Beth Sandore Namachchivaya, University Library; co-chair Jason Alt, NCSA Jack Brighton, College of Media, CME Michelle Butler, NCSA Mike Corn, Office of the CIO Dan Davidson, IGB Jennifer Eardley, DBS, OVCR Michael Edwards, College of LAS David Gerstenecker, College of ACES Gabe Gibson, College of LAS Howard Guenther, OVCR Tom Habing, University Library Maggie Helms, DBS Josh Henry, College of ACES Alice Jones, AITS/UA Joanne Kaczmarek, University Archives Jackie Kern, Facilities & Services Charley Kline, CITES Carol Livingstone, DMI Carol Malmgren, Office of the Registrar Glenda Morgan, Office of the CIO Frank Penrose, College of Engineering Sarah Shreeves, University Library Jason Strutz, University Library Chuck Wallbaum, School of Chemical Sciences Kristopher Williams, Materials Research Laboratory