2016 Availability Report
Full Report
2016 Veeam Availability Report: How to close a widening Availability Gap Enterprises must deliver on users’ demands for 24/7/365 access to data/applications or risk financial implications
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 1
Contents Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Research aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Modernizing the data center for the Always-On Enterprise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 What does it mean to be an Always-On Enterprise? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Improving the data center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 The Availability Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Availability Gap is still present . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Improving testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Speed of disaster recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 RTOs and RPOs: Reality falls short of the ideal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The cost of downtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Downtime is increasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 The impact of downtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Next steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendix 1: Country analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix 2: Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
vee.am/availability16
Executive Summary
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 3
vee.am/availability16
Research aims While business transformation is driven by a new breed of user — one that desires a seamless, connected experience — the ability for modern enterprises to deliver non-stop services and continually innovate has never been more urgent. However, are today’s businesses delivering what users need?
This study examines several areas in order to help educate decision makers, so they can turn their organization into an Always-On Enterprise: •
What does it mean to IT decision makers to work in an Always-On Enterprise?
Veeam®, an advocate of the Always-On Enterprise™ — a business that functions 24 hours a day all across the world — commissioned its fifth annual Availability Report to ask this very question.
•
What work is carried out in the data centers of respondent IT decision makers’ organizations?
•
Do organizations have an Availability Gap, and if so, what is stopping them from reducing it?
•
How reliable are organizations’ current backup processes, and how will they develop in the future?
•
The cost: What is the result of downtime? Is the impact purely financial, or are there more costs of which organizations should be aware?
How does one deliver the Always-On Enterprise? In simple terms, one must eradicate downtime. Veeam is aware that downtime can mean different things to different people and that the impact of downtime can vary from organization to organization. If unplanned downtime does occur, then organizations should have systems in place that reduce or entirely eliminate their Availability Gap — the gap between what users demand (i.e., 24/7 access to critical applications and data) and what IT departments can deliver.
To explore these areas, Veeam commissioned 1,140 interviews with senior decision makers in IT departments (referred to as ITDMs or respondents) in 24 countries, which are compared where appropriate to 630 interviews with ITDMs conducted in 2014.
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 4
vee.am/availability16
Executive summary Veeam’s research discovered that 84% of ITDMs interviewed — 2% higher than in 2014 — agree that their organization have an Availability Gap. To combat this, most organizations are investing in their data centers, with two-thirds (68%) doing so specifically to enable 24/7 Always-On operations. Enterprises appreciate the challenges facing them and are taking measures, yet they seem to be falling short. Savings on operational costs (65%) is also likely to be a driver for data center improvements. However, about 50% of respondents reported the cost of new technology as a barrier to achieving desired data center capabilities. This shows that IT departments’ budgets are under pressure, which may limit their ability to adopt the new technology they need to improve Availability. What is alarming is that despite obvious investments, the average number of unplanned downtime events reported has increased in the last year (from 13 events in 2014 to 15 events in 2015).
The average length of each downtime event has also increased (from less than 1.5 hours to almost 2 hours for mission-critical applications). Because of these increases, the average annual cost of downtime to organizations can be up to $16 million. That is $6 million higher than recorded in the 2014 study. In addition, application downtime can have an impact that goes beyond financial loss: The majority of respondents report that confidence in the organization (68%) and brand (62%) can also suffer. What this study clearly illustrates is that despite investments and senior ITDMs understanding that Availability is of paramount importance, the reality is that service levels are falling well short of their goals. Users demand a crisp, seamless experience, but they have to deal with services that are below par instead. This costs enterprises millions of dollars in lost revenue, productivity and brand reputation.
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Modernizing the data center for the Always-On Enterprise
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 6
vee.am/availability16
What does it mean to be an Always-On Enterprise?
Improving the data center Nearly all (94%) ITDMs report there is at least one additional capability that they would like to have in their organizations’ data centers.
ITDMs are most likely to report that end users ask them to provide support for real-time interactions (63%) and 24/7 global access (59%). This shows that it is not only a case of providing the devices to users that allow access with minimal support, but also one of enabling the users to maximize their use of the organization’s infrastructure.
High-speed recovery; i.e.,
2016 Veeam Availability Report: How to close a widening Availability Gap Enterprises must deliver on users’ demands for 24/7/365 access to data/applications or risk financial implications
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 1
Contents Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Research aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Modernizing the data center for the Always-On Enterprise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 What does it mean to be an Always-On Enterprise? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Improving the data center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 The Availability Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Availability Gap is still present . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Improving testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Speed of disaster recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 RTOs and RPOs: Reality falls short of the ideal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The cost of downtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Downtime is increasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 The impact of downtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Next steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendix 1: Country analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix 2: Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
vee.am/availability16
Executive Summary
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 3
vee.am/availability16
Research aims While business transformation is driven by a new breed of user — one that desires a seamless, connected experience — the ability for modern enterprises to deliver non-stop services and continually innovate has never been more urgent. However, are today’s businesses delivering what users need?
This study examines several areas in order to help educate decision makers, so they can turn their organization into an Always-On Enterprise: •
What does it mean to IT decision makers to work in an Always-On Enterprise?
Veeam®, an advocate of the Always-On Enterprise™ — a business that functions 24 hours a day all across the world — commissioned its fifth annual Availability Report to ask this very question.
•
What work is carried out in the data centers of respondent IT decision makers’ organizations?
•
Do organizations have an Availability Gap, and if so, what is stopping them from reducing it?
•
How reliable are organizations’ current backup processes, and how will they develop in the future?
•
The cost: What is the result of downtime? Is the impact purely financial, or are there more costs of which organizations should be aware?
How does one deliver the Always-On Enterprise? In simple terms, one must eradicate downtime. Veeam is aware that downtime can mean different things to different people and that the impact of downtime can vary from organization to organization. If unplanned downtime does occur, then organizations should have systems in place that reduce or entirely eliminate their Availability Gap — the gap between what users demand (i.e., 24/7 access to critical applications and data) and what IT departments can deliver.
To explore these areas, Veeam commissioned 1,140 interviews with senior decision makers in IT departments (referred to as ITDMs or respondents) in 24 countries, which are compared where appropriate to 630 interviews with ITDMs conducted in 2014.
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 4
vee.am/availability16
Executive summary Veeam’s research discovered that 84% of ITDMs interviewed — 2% higher than in 2014 — agree that their organization have an Availability Gap. To combat this, most organizations are investing in their data centers, with two-thirds (68%) doing so specifically to enable 24/7 Always-On operations. Enterprises appreciate the challenges facing them and are taking measures, yet they seem to be falling short. Savings on operational costs (65%) is also likely to be a driver for data center improvements. However, about 50% of respondents reported the cost of new technology as a barrier to achieving desired data center capabilities. This shows that IT departments’ budgets are under pressure, which may limit their ability to adopt the new technology they need to improve Availability. What is alarming is that despite obvious investments, the average number of unplanned downtime events reported has increased in the last year (from 13 events in 2014 to 15 events in 2015).
The average length of each downtime event has also increased (from less than 1.5 hours to almost 2 hours for mission-critical applications). Because of these increases, the average annual cost of downtime to organizations can be up to $16 million. That is $6 million higher than recorded in the 2014 study. In addition, application downtime can have an impact that goes beyond financial loss: The majority of respondents report that confidence in the organization (68%) and brand (62%) can also suffer. What this study clearly illustrates is that despite investments and senior ITDMs understanding that Availability is of paramount importance, the reality is that service levels are falling well short of their goals. Users demand a crisp, seamless experience, but they have to deal with services that are below par instead. This costs enterprises millions of dollars in lost revenue, productivity and brand reputation.
© 2016 Veeam Software. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Modernizing the data center for the Always-On Enterprise
2016 Veeam Availability Report | 6
vee.am/availability16
What does it mean to be an Always-On Enterprise?
Improving the data center Nearly all (94%) ITDMs report there is at least one additional capability that they would like to have in their organizations’ data centers.
ITDMs are most likely to report that end users ask them to provide support for real-time interactions (63%) and 24/7 global access (59%). This shows that it is not only a case of providing the devices to users that allow access with minimal support, but also one of enabling the users to maximize their use of the organization’s infrastructure.
High-speed recovery; i.e.,
