- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- LUSE best practices
Disk Enclosures
1753837
Members
8465
Online
108806
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-02-2010 11:51 AM
06-02-2010 11:51 AM
LUSE best practices
Is it best, performance wise that is, to create the luse within the PG or would one select ldevs from different PG's
Thanx in advance
Thanx in advance
1 REPLY 1
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-07-2010 05:46 AM
06-07-2010 05:46 AM
Re: LUSE best practices
Hi Greynolds,
Best practice would be to select devices from different PG's. Also, try to keep the number of devices in your LUSE low, since creating a LUSE is only a concatination of devices. The following, is a doc that I keep around that best describes the "performance considerations" when choosing to create a LUSE. I hope this helps...
LUSE Queuing Affects
Performance is a complex interrelationship of a number of factors that are related to the application. When the controller is first installed, the application may be able to get acceptable performance with LUSE. This can help to create a performance legend. As the Server's workload grows, the server may not be able to fully exploit the hardware capacity of the HDS controller. The software and hardware queuing affect of a LUSE serves as a limiting factor to the server ability to process transactions. This limitation can take place before the LUNS in the LUSE reach maximum usage.
For illustration purposes all the details are left out to focus on the predominant affect of the queuing phenomena.
If HOST1 has 5 LUNS in a LUN configured as LUSE, the host will maintain one IO Queue for the LUSE. If HOST2 has 5 LUNS configured as 5 separate LUNS, the host will maintain 5 IO Queues. HOST1 will initiate IO's from 1 Queue for the LUSE to the limit of IO's for a LUN at one time. HOST2 will initiate IO's from 5 Queues to the limit of 5 times the limit of IO's for a LUN at one time. The parallelism is significantly increased by the use of the 5 LUNS instead of 1 LUSE.
Best practice would be to select devices from different PG's. Also, try to keep the number of devices in your LUSE low, since creating a LUSE is only a concatination of devices. The following, is a doc that I keep around that best describes the "performance considerations" when choosing to create a LUSE. I hope this helps...
LUSE Queuing Affects
Performance is a complex interrelationship of a number of factors that are related to the application. When the controller is first installed, the application may be able to get acceptable performance with LUSE. This can help to create a performance legend. As the Server's workload grows, the server may not be able to fully exploit the hardware capacity of the HDS controller. The software and hardware queuing affect of a LUSE serves as a limiting factor to the server ability to process transactions. This limitation can take place before the LUNS in the LUSE reach maximum usage.
For illustration purposes all the details are left out to focus on the predominant affect of the queuing phenomena.
If HOST1 has 5 LUNS in a LUN configured as LUSE, the host will maintain one IO Queue for the LUSE. If HOST2 has 5 LUNS configured as 5 separate LUNS, the host will maintain 5 IO Queues. HOST1 will initiate IO's from 1 Queue for the LUSE to the limit of IO's for a LUN at one time. HOST2 will initiate IO's from 5 Queues to the limit of 5 times the limit of IO's for a LUN at one time. The parallelism is significantly increased by the use of the 5 LUNS instead of 1 LUSE.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP