Unveiling Major Trends in Data Center Technology
About UsConferencePartner With Us
CIOREVIEW >> Facility Management >> NEWS

Unveiling Major Trends in Data Center Technology

CIO Review

The growing demand of IT as a service (IaaS) combined with the need to reduce the cost and complexity has driven software-centric data centers to the brink of transformation. Gone are the days when companies would set up spacious data centers and invest heavily toward enhancing unnecessary infrastructure. In today’s world, data centers emphasize on maximizing the efficiency by offering modular equipment, virtualization, and customized cooling. The paradigmatic shifts have given serious reasons for organizations to migrate data centers to leased co-location facilities and public cloud. This has been followed by a string of trends that will bring a tremendous impact on the future of data center.

Physical Infrastructure and its Safety

IT and facility teams can achieve success by focusing on building or transforming their data center infrastructure to enable agility and measurability through operational efficiencies, ultimately ensuring readiness for future business requirements.

Stay ahead of the industry with exclusive feature stories on the top companies, expert insights and the latest news delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe today.

The easiest way to build a quick and manageable data center is by effectively utilizing the operational efficiency within the physical infrastructure. Creating a  data center that help meet today’s parameters—enabling thorough optimization of operational efficiencies and resources maximization— offers license to bolster the overall  data capacity and  management at cost effective rates. Most of the companies follow the usual method of enhancing the present data center efficiency to build.

One of the ways to accomplish this objective is by investing in befitting physical infrastructure. For instance spending on air sealing solution, thermal containment, ducting or other solutions can assist in separating hot air from cold. It is obvious that better sealing offers better way to improve capacity management and energy efficiency.

Another method is the deployment of Data Center Infrastructure Management (DCIM) into data center operations, it helps  gain specific and actionable insights about how and where to enhance centralized repository by monitoring and gauging power, cooling, space utilization, plus asset, and connectivity tracking.

Demand Data Access

Previously, data centers concentrated mainly on storage information and disaster recovery. Enterprises needed a suitable environment for backup and data was retrieved sporadically. Now the limelight is on analyzing and processing data for on-demand access. The emerging wearable technology and mobility creates the demand for latency that never existed before.

Data centers need to be more efficient and achieve higher density. From a service provider and co-location point of view, there will be a tremendous advancement in providing distributed computing. The large wave of growth will be found in point of presence (PoP) data centers, supporting network virtualization, and software defined networks. A combination of growth inside PoP and co-location will increase the need for interconnecting between service providers.

Hyper-convergence

Many organizations use high-speed growing architecture called hyper-converged infrastructure to implement cloud computing in the data center. This architecture firmly fused with storage, computation, virtualization, and networking has been able to allure many enterprises with its potential value. Majority of the enterprises consider hyper-convergence to be the most important technology because of its capability in eliminating barriers between storage, servers, and networking resources. These key functionalities have been assuring faster deployment, easy management and operations, cost savings, and offering greater elasticity and scalability. Today numerous firms are optimizing hyper-convergence. It is essential to fill the gap between virtual networks and physical infrastructure, and it is done by hyper-converged infrastructure management platforms offering combined view.

Data Centers to Utilize IoT Technologies

The incorporation of smarter technologies into the data center enables facility managers to keep the track of time status of components and geographical measurement to ensure smooth flow of operations. Sensors that gauge temperature, humidity, and electricity are integrated with network monitoring to assist data centers keep up high level of up time and slash the capital and operational expenses. Data centers will contain platforms, available to leverage IoT that mainly focuses towards integrating data from various sources to keep their computing facilities functioning at optimum capacity.

Software Driven Infrastructure

Another formidable trend in the world of data center is the software defined infrastructure that is virtualized and delivered as service. Virtualization has many benefits including advanced testing, easier backups, and high-speed redeployments. The debate on the feasibility of software driven infrastructure is never ending, especially retrieving the data from the storage in virtual environments. However, latest virtualization technologies are looking to enhance the performance of virtualization in the data center.

Virtual storage area network (VSAN) is one of the latest technologies. Recently, VMware announced its VSAN, a software-defined storage system designed into the hypervisor. A virtualization tool, like VSAN aids to improve flexibility and automates the activities in the data center.

Flash Storage

The use of flash in the data center has increased in recent times; it is expected to grow even more in the near future. The flash storage is included in the server to enhance spinning disks or to swap the disks.  Flash capacities larger than disk drives are expected to release and awaited for big price cuts from large enterprise storage companies. Ultimately, the flash used in data centers will simplify performance tuning and makes life easier by eliminating disk drive failure.

Colocation

Most of the enterprises are looking for ways to reduce the cost associated with IT infrastructure and invest it on evolving ventures such as software development and data analytics. The answer to the cost effective IT infrastructure is Colocation. It provides economical options for enterprises that are looking to spend reasonably on new data centers. Aspects like scalability, security, and maintenance make colocation a cost-effective business model. This form of cost-effective IT infrastructure is estimated to advance from its present $22.8 billion in spending to a $36 billion business all over the world by the end of 2017, as per the  new report from 451 Data Center Research. The study also predicts the  growth of global collocation footprint to 75 percent while global revenue will increase by 63 percent. “Colocation offers an alternative to pay only for what is being used, without worrying about the costs of building a new facility, or wasting space in current one,” suggests an excerpt from a blog post from data center operator OnRamp

 

Developing Block Scalability

Enterprises would want to implement the architecture used by large cloud giants like Facebook, Google, and Amazon that is why they look for highly responsive and flexible IT environments to meet the business requirements. However, they will not be willing to give up the flexibility they’ve grown accustomed to with the traditional architectures and technology. Infrastructure that enable building-block scale, with the equality of resiliency and redundancy using software-defined approaches will be well-accepted than those with scale aspirations.

Automation of Activities

Automation of data center management activities will become the standard model to reduce human efforts and lessen errors as well as offer rapid response to equipment failures. There will be a change in the way how infrastructure and operations teams manage IT environments with the launch of fool proof instructions such as using IP discovery for automatic validation. Today, administrators are required to incorporate latest skills and get accustomed to the new environment, avoiding repetitive tasks like provisioning storage.  Organizations now focus on automation, API integrations between technologies, user experience and how to integrate the new skills with the old.

Cloud-based solutions

Today’s IT application is merged with cloud infrastructure. The strategy that data centers incorporate will provide the greatest predictability to data center managers. The new data center strategy involves integrated approach, along with the association between business and IT teams. When the goals are crystal-clear and positioned, enterprise can move on to a hybrid data center that not only prioritizes the business but also enhances agility, security, and IT performance.

Inference

The future of data center looks very promising; there have been major firms that are contemplating to take a huge step away from managing their own data centers and completely getting into the cloud. Many organizations are able to perform well with cloud based solution by balancing performance and simplicity of the public cloud whereas other companies are still concerned with cloud security and cost. As cloud based solutions become more secure and less expensive, organizations tend to use data centers that are basically cloud-based.  With so much of hype around, it’s interesting to see how the data center will flourish and transform over the next few years.

More in News

A software engineering and AI analytics purchase can fail long before model accuracy becomes a concern. The bigger challenge is often the handoff between existing infrastructure and new analytics, especially when camera networks and edge devices were never designed to share context. Replacing everything may simplify architecture on paper, but it can strain capital requirements and stretch deployment timelines. Buyers need to know whether a platform can work across existing technology boundaries without turning modernization into a wholesale infrastructure project.  Integration depth is therefore more revealing than the number of AI features on a product sheet. A useful platform should accept heterogeneous inputs and expose their data through a common control layer without forcing every piece of existing hardware to conform to one technical standard. It should also preserve the usefulness of legacy assets while making their information accessible to newer analytics. That matters in distributed environments where hardware replacement may be slow or economically unjustified. The real question is whether modernization can proceed around installed infrastructure rather than requiring a clean slate.  Real-time analytics creates an attention problem of its own. Video feeds and sensor events can overwhelm staff when every detection is treated as equally important. Buyers should examine how a platform separates routine activity from events that merit human review, and then look at how quickly those events reach the people responsible for validation. The difference between raw monitoring and useful analytics lies in this filtering step. A system that produces more alerts without improving prioritization merely transfers workload from observation to triage.  Architecture becomes more consequential as data volumes rise. Sending every high-definition stream to a centralized cloud environment can create avoidable bandwidth costs and response delays. Edge processing can reduce that burden when analytics are performed close to the source and only selected information moves upstream. Yet edge deployment introduces management demands. Devices and application services still need a coherent way to exchange information and support later investigation. Buyers should also examine how much infrastructure complexity is added when analytics move closer to the source.  “ CFBD ’s hybrid architecture connects legacy environments to newer computing infrastructure through hyperconvergence and virtualization.” Searchability deserves equal importance. Once video or sensor data has been transformed into structured metadata, teams should be able to move from live detection to later investigation without manually reviewing hours of footage. Useful systems retain descriptive attributes and behavioral context in forms that can be queried quickly. The buying question is whether that context survives across live monitoring and retrospective analysis rather than being trapped in separate workflows. Fast retrieval matters because delayed investigation can erase much of the advantage gained from real-time detection.  CFBD merits consideration for buyers facing this mix of integration pressure and analytics workload. Its AZOR Ecosystem, a real-time data orchestration platform, centralizes video and sensor information. AZOR Panel, a centralized monitoring interface, receives AI-filtered events for human validation. AZOR Analytics, a video analytics component, supports real-time and forensic analysis, while edge gateways can process video near the source and pass lighter event data upstream. Its hybrid architecture connects legacy environments to newer computing infrastructure through hyperconvergence and virtualization. The fit is strongest where replacement costs and operator overload are material constraints. For organizations that need AI analytics without discarding usable infrastructure, CFBD is a practical choice.  ...Read more
Customer outreach is moving faster than many compliance programs were designed to govern. A campaign assembled in hours can pass through several applications before a call, text, email or prerecorded message reaches a customer, while autonomous agents compress that cycle further. The exposure is no longer limited to whether a record appeared on a suppression list. Consent status, channel permissions, time-of-day rules and state or federal restrictions can change the answer at the moment of contact. A platform that checks too late leaves legal teams reconstructing decisions after the communication has already occurred. Static controls also create a quieter commercial problem. Large enterprises often carry separate customer records across business units, and a broad opt-out can be applied far beyond the product or channel the customer intended. Conservative suppression may reduce legal exposure, yet it can also remove legitimate audiences from campaigns and weaken the return on CRM or marketing technology investments. Effective governance needs enough context to distinguish a prohibited contact from an allowable one without forcing every business unit to maintain its own interpretation of the rules. The harder test is whether those distinctions survive as consent records move between systems and outreach programs change. “Gryphon’s deterministic rules-based decisioning evaluates contact permissions in real time, while automated evidence capture gives legal and compliance teams a defensible record of why each decision was made.” Speed matters at the decision point, not merely during campaign preparation. List scrubbing and periodic audits remain useful for certain tasks, but neither is designed to govern communications that originate across contact centers, individual employees, enterprise applications and autonomous agents. Decisioning should sit inside the existing workflow and evaluate the applicable permissions before outreach proceeds. The answer also needs to return quickly enough that compliance does not become a queue. Enterprise scale is equally important. A control layer that works only for one channel or one application recreates the same fragmentation it was purchased to remove. Policy changes also need to propagate without campaign teams waiting for separate rule updates in each downstream application, especially when restrictions take effect quickly. Defensibility separates governance from simple blocking. Executives should expect a clear record of the rule applied, the evidence used, the policy version and the reason a communication was allowed or stopped. Those records need to remain searchable as regulations and internal policies change. Deterministic decisioning has particular value where an organization must later explain exactly why a contact was permitted. The same discipline helps compliance teams identify oversuppression rather than treating every uncertain record as unusable. Buyers should also examine how readily the platform connects to existing CRM, contact-center, marketing automation and governance systems, since a long replacement project can undermine the speed advantage that real-time controls are meant to provide. Gryphon  is the premier choice for enterprises that need contact governance embedded directly into customer engagement rather than added as a later review. Its platform applies real-time controls across voice, SMS, email and interactions generated by AI agents while integrating with existing enterprise applications. Gryphon’s deterministic rules-based decisioning evaluates contact permissions in real time, while automated evidence capture gives legal and compliance teams a defensible record of why each decision was made. Compliance Hub extends that visibility into audit research and reporting. The platform also identifies contacts suppressed too broadly, helping organizations preserve legitimate reach without relaxing policy enforcement. For buyers balancing regulatory exposure against legitimate customer contact, point-of-contact enforcement paired with documented decision logic makes Gryphon a practical recommendation. ...Read more
Disconnected data work rarely begins at the pipeline itself. The delay often appears earlier, when a proposed data product moves from a business idea into requirements, architecture decisions, access controls and a development environment. Each handoff can introduce another tool or approval path, while product context becomes harder to preserve. By the time engineering begins, teams may already be reconciling mismatched project names, duplicated documentation, fragmented ownership and inconsistent setup across systems. Portfolio-level visibility also matters before engineering starts. A platform that preserves business cases alongside product definitions can help leadership compare proposed work, assign teams and select technology stacks without separating prioritization from the delivery path that eventually executes those decisions. That fragmentation becomes expensive when orchestration is purchased as another isolated layer. Data teams commonly work across cloud infrastructure, code repositories, ticketing systems and specialist data platforms, while product managers and architects need continuity across the same work. Replacing that estate is rarely the practical objective. A stronger platform coordinates existing environments while preserving product identity and approved technology choices throughout delivery. Integration depth matters less as a feature count than as a way to remove repeated setup and cross-tool reconciliation. “Calibo can establish access to selected technology stacks and generate CI/CD pathways for controlled movement between development and production environments.” Self-service also needs boundaries. Provisioning development environments, granting access, creating repositories and triggering infrastructure changes can remove substantial waiting time, but only when those actions follow established controls. The useful distinction is whether routine requests can execute from approved templates and policies rather than pass through manual service tickets. That changes the role of platform and architecture teams. Instead of completing repetitive setup on demand, they can establish guardrails that engineering teams use independently. Traceability becomes harder once a project leaves experimentation and enters controlled delivery. Changes to requirements can alter pipeline work, while release movement creates dependencies across development, test, staging and production. Executives need a clear line from the original business case to the technical work that follows, particularly when multiple data products compete for budget or shared engineering capacity. Visibility into status, resource use, dependencies and release progress helps management identify where work is waiting without rebuilding the picture from separate tools. It can also expose queueing between teams before delayed approvals become late-stage release problems. Release control should be treated as part of orchestration rather than an adjacent DevOps concern. Creating a pipeline is only part of the purchase decision. The harder question is whether code and data products can move through governed environments without custom coordination each time. Automated CI/CD setup, reusable templates, policy-based promotion and dependency visibility can make that movement repeatable. This becomes more important for AI-related data work, where experiments can appear quickly but production use depends on controlled access, governed data movement, documented lineage and consistent release practices. Calibo merits recommendation for enterprises that want data orchestration tied directly to the broader delivery lifecycle. Its Data Fabric Studio supports reusable data pipelines. The wider platform carries product context into the development toolchain while automating environment setup. Calibo can establish access to selected technology stacks and generate CI/CD pathways for controlled movement between development and production environments. Its Release Orchestration capability extends that model into deployment governance and dependency management. This gives data teams a self-service framework that reduces manual handoffs while keeping technical work connected to the product context and enterprise controls that initiated it. ...Read more
As software development becomes more reliant on AI, companies have started to focus more on the process of coding, changing, and attributing. Code attribution systems for AI are becoming common for helping engineering professionals know the source of code, differentiate human contributions from that done by AI, and remain visible in the development environment. Their importance goes beyond that of mere tracking since attribution can affect intellectual property management, security assessments, compliance procedures, and engineering performance. However, the implementation of these platforms poses some problems that organizations need to solve before they can effectively use attribution. How Can Organizations Maintain Accurate Code Attribution? An important issue here is the question of establishing accurate attribution in a complicated process of software development. Nowadays, software development includes many repositories, development environments, libraries, automated systems, and cooperation models. The suggestions generated by the artificial intelligence can be accepted, modified, mixed with the existing code, or completely rewritten by the developer. As a result, it becomes difficult to distinguish what part was done with the help of AI and what was developed independently by humans. Data quality also poses a challenge. Attributing authorship requires the availability of development history, history of code changes, prompts, suggestions, and modification patterns. Poor data quality can lead to erroneous findings, especially where organizations employ different methods for software development or use a different set of tools for development. It is imperative for businesses to come up with data standards for the consistency of findings. Issues related to privacy and intellectual property rights make the scenario even more complicated. The source code may include business logic, proprietary processes, and customer data. Companies that choose to implement the attribution platforms need to pay special attention to the way the development data will be gathered, analyzed, stored, and made available. What Makes AI Attribution Difficult Across Enterprise Development? The other challenge is that of incorporating the attribution process into the current engineering process. Companies typically have heterogeneous technology stacks and development processes. This implies that any attribution solution has to be compatible with the source code repositories, issue tracking platforms, code reviews, security mechanisms and so forth. If not, fragmentation and extra manual processes arise. Interpretation is just as crucial. Metrics related to attribution should not be automatically assumed to reflect developer productivity or the quality of code written. While AI can alter how engineers spend their time, more generated code does not imply a better result. Business context regarding maintainability, reliability, reviews, security, and business needs should also be factored in, along with attribution. Attributing AI code is going to be contingent upon transparency, interoperability, and good governance. Enterprises are going to require established processes for attributing contributions made by AI and also explaining how the information is to be utilized. Software systems capable of creating traceable evidence, easy integration, and clear reporting can enable enterprises to create more trust when it comes to AI-enabled development efforts. Taking a good approach towards these considerations will enable enterprises to get visibility regarding the use of AI in coding without having to risk their intellectual property rights and engineering accountability. ...Read more