<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: FC10 Performance in Operating System - HP-UX</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149359#M157281</link>
    <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do not know if it is possible to take some load of c5t0d0 and c5t8d0 and place it on c5t6d0/c5t3d0/c5t1d0. The &amp;gt;50% busy is high and you have some disks idle. But no worries the wait and serv times do not give reason to panic. You could go for striping to maximise your performance.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Gideon</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:24:32 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>G. Vrijhoeven</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:24:32Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FC10 Performance</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149357#M157279</link>
      <description>The following are stats captured over a 10 minute period with one second interval using sar -d.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The device is an FC10 loaded with 18 Gb disks and a single LCC.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Do these stats look good or bad?  I think that they are very good.  The disks are running raw with Informix.&lt;BR /&gt;    device   %busy   avque   r+w/s  blks/s  avwait  avserv&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t0d0   73.33    0.50     216    1457    4.76    7.93&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t5d0   16.14    0.50      35     297    4.91    6.39&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t8d0   50.75    0.50     138    1897    4.83    6.59&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t9d0    9.39    0.50      24     149    4.86    4.47&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t4d0    2.74    0.50      13     291    4.81    2.55&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t6d0    0.70    0.50       1      11    4.88    8.19&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t2d0   39.73    0.50     116    1680    4.79    4.48&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t3d0    0.32    0.50       1       4    5.01    4.75&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t1d0    0.69    0.50       1       5    5.22    5.13&lt;BR /&gt;Average    c5t7d0    1.11    0.50      11     322    4.53    1.11&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Craig&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:13:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149357#M157279</guid>
      <dc:creator>Craig A. Sharp</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:13:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FC10 Performance</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149358#M157280</link>
      <description>Craig,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The important thing is that YOU think they're good.  I always say "if the users aren't complaining, then performance must be good".  The %busy ratios are widely unbalanced, going from 73% all the way down to .32%.  I would think some tuning could distribute the load a little better, but, as I said, if you're happy with it, why mess with a good thing?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Pete</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:23:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149358#M157280</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pete Randall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:23:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FC10 Performance</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149359#M157281</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do not know if it is possible to take some load of c5t0d0 and c5t8d0 and place it on c5t6d0/c5t3d0/c5t1d0. The &amp;gt;50% busy is high and you have some disks idle. But no worries the wait and serv times do not give reason to panic. You could go for striping to maximise your performance.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Gideon</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:24:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149359#M157281</guid>
      <dc:creator>G. Vrijhoeven</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:24:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FC10 Performance</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149360#M157282</link>
      <description>Hi Craig,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Yes, they're pretty good.&lt;BR /&gt;Rule of thumb is ANY time avwait &amp;amp; avserv are in single digits you're doing well.&lt;BR /&gt;Don't worry about having disks "hardly" used %-wise. It may simply be that you're not running anything off of those disks at that time. Just look to see what's actually on those disks &amp;amp; if it is data that "should" probably be accessed, then you can think about redistributing the data.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Rgds,&lt;BR /&gt;Jeff</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:28:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149360#M157282</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jeff Schussele</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:28:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FC10 Performance</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149361#M157283</link>
      <description>Other said that, if you are happy, then do not touch it.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;For me, they look bad.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;First line: 73% busy with a transfer of 1457 blocks (=700KB/sec). Theo other stats are not better. I would look for vxfs performance patches, if users should complain.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;But if users do not say anything, wait....&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;   Massimo</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:31:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/fc10-performance/m-p/3149361#M157283</guid>
      <dc:creator>Massimo Bianchi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-12-19T08:31:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

