- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- Re: Performance XP24K
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
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
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- 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
тАО08-05-2008 05:23 AM
тАО08-05-2008 05:23 AM
Performance XP24K
Other question, i need documentation for Performance in XP24K, manuals, tips, etc. and best practices
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-05-2008 05:47 AM
тАО08-05-2008 05:47 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-05-2008 08:05 AM
тАО08-05-2008 08:05 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
For the first question, the answer can be very long and need opinions and experience to get till there. I have attached the ESG's white paper, read on from page 16 and you will learn how the configuration tricks the performance. Some of the numbers can be found from HP's website where they are talking what is the difference between XP12k and 24k.
For the second question, Open-V is always preferred over other emulations, reason that Open-V uses less of internal configuration memory space to build the volumes and second is that LUSEs degrades the overall LDEV performance. So there is a plus for Open-V and a negative for LUSE that will give you a ++ to go for Open-V.
Hope that helps.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-05-2008 09:13 AM
тАО08-05-2008 09:13 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
Some terms need to be explain first:
Parity group (PG) -> physical group of disk on one loop (it is 8 disks -> 7D+1P, 6D+2P, 4D+4P). The PGs can be concatenated into max 28D+4P. Therefore from the perf reasons the best approach is if the host LUN is distributed across many PGs and then LVM on the host side:
example:
lets assume that you want to have a 100GB LUN from XP(24000) for Unix/Linux host.
a)Then it is much better to create 4x25GB or 5x20GB (RAID5) and give it to the host LVM and even LVM stripe them.
b) if we create one "big" 100GB LDEV then we are limited by the number of disk in the PG and 8 disks - that is only few spindles
c) if we create the same as in a) but as LUSE, then yes we are doing the distribution across the PGs, but unfortunately LUSE is only spanned not stripped, that means that all writes will go first to the LDEV nr. 1 only, then LDEV nr. 2, etc.
maybe the question is the LDEV or LUSE volume. The main difference that LDEV is striped and LDEV is not (only spanned volume).
The par
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-05-2008 09:24 AM
тАО08-05-2008 09:24 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
Some terms need to be explain first:
Parity group (PG) -> physical group of disk on one loop (it is 8 disks -> 7D+1P, 6D+2P, 4D+4P). The PGs can be concatenated into max 28D+4P. Therefore from the perf reasons the best approach is if the host LUN is distributed across many PGs and then LVM on the host side:
example:
lets assume that you want to have a 100GB LUN from XP(24000) for Unix/Linux host.
a)Then it is much better to create 4x25GB or 5x20GB (RAID5) and give it to the host LVM and even LVM stripe them.
b) if we create one "big" 100GB LDEV then we are limited by the number of disk in the PG and 8 disks - that is only few spindles
c) if we create the same as in a) but as LUSE, then yes we are doing the distribution across the PGs, but unfortunately LUSE is only spanned not stripped, that means that all writes will go first to the LDEV nr. 1 only, then LDEV nr. 2, etc.
Resume:
Unix/Linux -> smaller LDEVs and LVM
Windows -> there are some FS (NTFS) and therefore LVM limitations. So here the PG concatenation helps - max is 32 disks (28D+4P) and LUSE should be distributed across the different PGs.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-05-2008 09:39 AM
тАО08-05-2008 09:39 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
this thread can also help:
http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?admit=109447626+1217957643931+28353475&threadId=984111
and here is the xp12000 best practices, (yes it is xp12000 but the main recommendations are the same)
http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/4AA0-7923ENW.pdf
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-08-2008 05:52 AM
тАО08-08-2008 05:52 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-08-2008 05:58 AM
тАО08-08-2008 05:58 AM
Re: Performance XP24K
i am downloading it to you to see if there is any difference, because "mine" works :-)