<?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 Autoraid 12H Performance Question in Disk Enclosures</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899203#M38807</link>
    <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;one of our 12H goes slower and slower. Weekly i have to run a big copyjob (removing old data before) to this 12H. First time after creating the LUNs the job takes approx. 5 hours. Each time it runs it takes much longer. Now it's nearly 16 hours. If i recreate the LUNs it will start with 5 hours again. Because this 12H is low in space, thought of heavy balancing between raid level 0/1 and 5, so i hoped that i could reduce that by allocating all avaible space to LUNs for forcing raid 5. It didn't help really.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The VG is striped across two LUNs, using the X-Controller primary for the first LUN and alternate for the second LUN. &lt;BR /&gt;Last week i configured sar for collecting performance data. I wonder why the values for "avwait" of the two devices (LUN1 and 2) are much different. I expected them for beeing approx. equal. &lt;BR /&gt;The output from sar, arraydsp and vgdisplay is attached in a *.txt File.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Why do the values differ so much ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;BR /&gt;Lothar&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2005 06:12:52 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Lothar Krueler</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2005-05-02T06:12:52Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Autoraid 12H Performance Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899203#M38807</link>
      <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;one of our 12H goes slower and slower. Weekly i have to run a big copyjob (removing old data before) to this 12H. First time after creating the LUNs the job takes approx. 5 hours. Each time it runs it takes much longer. Now it's nearly 16 hours. If i recreate the LUNs it will start with 5 hours again. Because this 12H is low in space, thought of heavy balancing between raid level 0/1 and 5, so i hoped that i could reduce that by allocating all avaible space to LUNs for forcing raid 5. It didn't help really.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The VG is striped across two LUNs, using the X-Controller primary for the first LUN and alternate for the second LUN. &lt;BR /&gt;Last week i configured sar for collecting performance data. I wonder why the values for "avwait" of the two devices (LUN1 and 2) are much different. I expected them for beeing approx. equal. &lt;BR /&gt;The output from sar, arraydsp and vgdisplay is attached in a *.txt File.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Why do the values differ so much ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;BR /&gt;Lothar&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2005 06:12:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899203#M38807</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lothar Krueler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-05-02T06:12:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Autoraid 12H Performance Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899204#M38808</link>
      <description>Lothar,&lt;BR /&gt;It has been our experience that without a lot of free, unsued, virgin space available, the autoraid will just not perform very well.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;As you've seen, just deleting files will not put that space back into the unused mode. You have to totally recreate the disks to make that clean space usable by the system.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;You will drive yourself crazy trying to run statistics on that autoraid if its nearly full.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;My humble advice would be to either add more or bigger disks if possible, or look for a newer technology array.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Mark</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2005 18:16:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899204#M38808</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark Grossman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-05-02T18:16:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Autoraid 12H Performance Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899205#M38809</link>
      <description>Mark,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;thank you. I think that changing disks to bigger ones would result in better / normal performance, too. My question is, could it be, that one of the LUNS is much slower than the other one ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Lothar</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 02:08:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899205#M38809</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lothar Krueler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-05-03T02:08:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Autoraid 12H Performance Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899206#M38810</link>
      <description>Lothar,&lt;BR /&gt;not sure whats going on with that sar output. However, one of the luns is much much larger than the other and could account for the difference in statistics.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Mark</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 12:51:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899206#M38810</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark Grossman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-05-03T12:51:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Autoraid 12H Performance Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899207#M38811</link>
      <description>Mark,&lt;BR /&gt;thank you again. The LUNs are exact equal in size, each 10771 PEs - but they seem to be not equal in performance. It looks like the LUN presented by c9t0d0 is much more slow than that presented by c10t1d1 - with nearly the same busy-values.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Since there are no further responses, i think possible answers to this question may only have an theoretical charachter, that really will not be of any use. &lt;BR /&gt;Thanks again&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Lothar</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2005 02:49:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/autoraid-12h-performance-question/m-p/4899207#M38811</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lothar Krueler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-05-04T02:49:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

