- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- SC-600 RAID-5 vs RAID 0,1
Disk Enclosures
1753620
Members
5994
Online
108797
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
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
Forums
Discussions
юдл
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
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Go to solution
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
тАО03-21-2001 03:42 AM
тАО03-21-2001 03:42 AM
I have a client asking me for the posible perfomance increase in case of change in a SC-600 array of a set of disk. Is there any kind of benchmark or comparison anywhere?
client always has the reason??
Solved! Go to Solution.
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-21-2001 10:52 AM
тАО03-21-2001 10:52 AM
Re: SC-600 RAID-5 vs RAID 0,1
Hello,
Are you asking about the fc60? If so, you can find specifications here:
http://www.storage.hp.com/disk_arrays/midrange/fc60/index.html
and all of HP's disks and arrays are found here:
http://www.storage.hp.com/disk_arrays/index.html
Are you asking about the fc60? If so, you can find specifications here:
http://www.storage.hp.com/disk_arrays/midrange/fc60/index.html
and all of HP's disks and arrays are found here:
http://www.storage.hp.com/disk_arrays/index.html
A problem well defined is half solved.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-22-2001 01:37 AM
тАО03-22-2001 01:37 AM
Re: SC-600 RAID-5 vs RAID 0,1
Yes, you are right. Is the FC-60 what I was talking about. The fact is that they have installed Oracle Aplicattions over a FC 60 on RAID-5. Oracle has the general recomendation of using RAID 0/1 when installing Oracle so thats why they are thinking about migrating from RAID-5 to RAID 0,1. And that's the reason why I would like to know if there is any benchmark or comparison anywhere.
client always has the reason??
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-22-2001 07:25 AM
тАО03-22-2001 07:25 AM
Solution
What you're asking for: the performance diff b/w RAID-5 and RAID 0,1 for the FC-60. Can't help you there - I'd imagine the performance you net would be implementation dependent. So the answer is, it depends.
I can give you some real world experiences:
If Oracle had their way, everything would be installed on 2G striped Jamaica's. Unfortunately, the folks who came up with that haven't run many high availability shops.
We've got FC60's and Auto RAIDs. We keep *.dbf on the RAIDs w/o much problem. We keep the most commonly used data pinned in memory - we're not transactional, we're upload/and view, so this works really well for us.
Here's the perf numbers from the user docs:
RAID 0 ? Simultaneous access to multiple disks increases I/O performance. In
general, the greater the number of mirrored pairs, the greater the increase
in performance.
RAID 1 ? A RAID 1 mirrored pair requires one I/O operation for a read and two I/O
operations for a write, one to each disk in the pair.
? The disks in a RAID 1 mirrored pair are locked in synchronization, but the
disk array can read data from the module whose read/write heads are the
closest.
? RAID 1 read performance can be twice that of an individual disk. Write
performance can be the same as that of an individual disk.
RAID 0/1 ? Simultaneous access to multiple mirrored pairs increases I/O performance.
In general, the greater the number of mirrored pairs, the greater the
increase in performance.
RAID 5 ? Provides high read throughput for small block-size requests (2 KB to 8 KB).
? Write performance is limited by the need to perform four I/O operations per
write request.
? Because some I/O operations occur simultaneously, performance depends
on the number of disks in the volume group. Additional disks may improve
performance.
? The I/O performance of RAID 5 benefits significantly from write caching.
As you'll note, the performance of RAID 5 and the performance of RAID 1/0 are contingent on the number of disks in the LUN, etc. The performance will also be contingent on the READ/WRITE behavior of your application.
So from your client's perspective, just because the use RAID 0/1 doesn't necessarily mean that they'll see performance improvement, or if they do see performance improvement that the performance improvement is cost justified.
You can say that given a system that's heavy on the WRITE side of the READ/WRITE equation, a system in RAID 0/1 should outperform the same system using a similar amount of disk space in RAID 5.
Here's the pointer to the doc that gives additional detail:
http://www.hp.com/cposupport/manual_set/lpg28493.pdf
Start reading at page 44.
I can give you some real world experiences:
If Oracle had their way, everything would be installed on 2G striped Jamaica's. Unfortunately, the folks who came up with that haven't run many high availability shops.
We've got FC60's and Auto RAIDs. We keep *.dbf on the RAIDs w/o much problem. We keep the most commonly used data pinned in memory - we're not transactional, we're upload/and view, so this works really well for us.
Here's the perf numbers from the user docs:
RAID 0 ? Simultaneous access to multiple disks increases I/O performance. In
general, the greater the number of mirrored pairs, the greater the increase
in performance.
RAID 1 ? A RAID 1 mirrored pair requires one I/O operation for a read and two I/O
operations for a write, one to each disk in the pair.
? The disks in a RAID 1 mirrored pair are locked in synchronization, but the
disk array can read data from the module whose read/write heads are the
closest.
? RAID 1 read performance can be twice that of an individual disk. Write
performance can be the same as that of an individual disk.
RAID 0/1 ? Simultaneous access to multiple mirrored pairs increases I/O performance.
In general, the greater the number of mirrored pairs, the greater the
increase in performance.
RAID 5 ? Provides high read throughput for small block-size requests (2 KB to 8 KB).
? Write performance is limited by the need to perform four I/O operations per
write request.
? Because some I/O operations occur simultaneously, performance depends
on the number of disks in the volume group. Additional disks may improve
performance.
? The I/O performance of RAID 5 benefits significantly from write caching.
As you'll note, the performance of RAID 5 and the performance of RAID 1/0 are contingent on the number of disks in the LUN, etc. The performance will also be contingent on the READ/WRITE behavior of your application.
So from your client's perspective, just because the use RAID 0/1 doesn't necessarily mean that they'll see performance improvement, or if they do see performance improvement that the performance improvement is cost justified.
You can say that given a system that's heavy on the WRITE side of the READ/WRITE equation, a system in RAID 0/1 should outperform the same system using a similar amount of disk space in RAID 5.
Here's the pointer to the doc that gives additional detail:
http://www.hp.com/cposupport/manual_set/lpg28493.pdf
Start reading at page 44.
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