<?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 THP Pool Volumes in XP Storage</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482681#M1308</link>
    <description>I have question, i am going to implemenmtation THP on the XP24000, but what is  best practices create AG 28+4 or 14+2 or 7+1 for create the Pool Volumes what is the best performance.?  I see the document for ThP Xp Best Practices do not answer to this question.</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:32:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Juan Carlos Mendoza Cal</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-08-19T17:32:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>THP Pool Volumes</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482681#M1308</link>
      <description>I have question, i am going to implemenmtation THP on the XP24000, but what is  best practices create AG 28+4 or 14+2 or 7+1 for create the Pool Volumes what is the best performance.?  I see the document for ThP Xp Best Practices do not answer to this question.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:32:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482681#M1308</guid>
      <dc:creator>Juan Carlos Mendoza Cal</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-19T17:32:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: THP Pool Volumes</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482682#M1309</link>
      <description>I give the following as my personal opinion.....&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Due to the random nature in which THP pages are allocated to V-VOLs I do not see concatenated Array Groups (14+2 and 28+4) being of much if any advantage over standard array groups.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Of course concatenated array groups are great for classicla thick LDEVs due to the way they lay down consecutive RAID stripes per LDEV over more spindles.  However, I dont see any advantage with THP.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;More important is to stick with the best practices outlined in the following paper which I wrote a while ago - &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://blogs.rupturedmonkey.com/?p=274" target="_blank"&gt;http://blogs.rupturedmonkey.com/?p=274&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Nigel</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:54:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482682#M1309</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nigel Poulton</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-20T13:54:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: THP Pool Volumes</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482683#M1310</link>
      <description>I recommend using Raid 5 (7+1) in most cases. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Exceptions: &lt;BR /&gt;- Only if you need very high write performance use Raid1 (2+2)&lt;BR /&gt;- When using SATA disks I would use Raid 6 (6+2) due to long recovery times after a disk failure&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Background on using Raid5 (7+1) vs (28+4): &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;1. 4x (7+1) compared to 1x (28+4) has a sligtly higher overall performance&lt;BR /&gt;2. Having more ldevs gives you more queues and striping which is beneficial to performance&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;BTW: You will find a ThP whitepaper here: &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://h18006.www1.hp.com/storage/arraywhitepapers.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://h18006.www1.hp.com/storage/arraywhitepapers.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Also check the ThP Manual on hp.docs &amp;gt; XP software&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Cheers&lt;BR /&gt;XP-Pete</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 07:33:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482683#M1310</guid>
      <dc:creator>Peter Mattei</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-24T07:33:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: THP Pool Volumes</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482684#M1311</link>
      <description>Peter and I are in different regions, so I thought that I would chime in here and agree with him - in the Americas we're also recommending the same as Pete outlined.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;More than 95% are RAID5, 7+1.  The ThP stripes over the LDEVs presented to it, so there's no advantage to 14+2 or 28+4 - in fact, the double striping seems to slow things down a little.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Good luck!</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:36:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/xp-storage/thp-pool-volumes/m-p/4482684#M1311</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vincent Fleming</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-24T13:36:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

