- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- Witch Replication Protocol has better performance?
Disk Enclosures
1752290
Members
4637
Online
108786
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
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
тАО03-01-2011 02:15 AM
тАО03-01-2011 02:15 AM
Witch Replication Protocol has better performance?
Two EVA8400 with FC SAN Switches with Port Channel configured with two ISL ports per switch.
With Protocol HP-FC (in order delivery) only one of the ISL ports in every port channel is used (active-pasive), but it is one round trip.
With Protocol HP-SCSI FCP (exchange delivery) both ISL ports in every Port channel are used (active-active), but is is two round trip.
Remote site is about 10KM far.
Wich protocol can have better performance?
With Protocol HP-FC (in order delivery) only one of the ISL ports in every port channel is used (active-pasive), but it is one round trip.
With Protocol HP-SCSI FCP (exchange delivery) both ISL ports in every Port channel are used (active-active), but is is two round trip.
Remote site is about 10KM far.
Wich protocol can have better performance?
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-01-2011 08:47 AM
тАО03-01-2011 08:47 AM
Re: Witch Replication Protocol has better performance?
Make sure that EVA with Latest XCS - 9534 and select HP-SCSI (Exchnage based routing) which is the better performace method.
I have confiured at one customer place with Async replicaiton and found good.
I have confiured at one customer place with Async replicaiton and found good.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-01-2011 09:23 AM
тАО03-01-2011 09:23 AM
Re: Witch Replication Protocol has better performance?
Thanks for your answer.
This protocol option is only available from 09534000 and our EVAs have that version.
With Async mode, perhaps it is the better option, but we have Sync mode and so, every I/O has two round trips to acknowledgement operation.
So, I don't know if this time lost, having two round trips, is bigger than the time gained travelling for two ISL ports instead of only for one ISL port per fabric.
That is the question.
This protocol option is only available from 09534000 and our EVAs have that version.
With Async mode, perhaps it is the better option, but we have Sync mode and so, every I/O has two round trips to acknowledgement operation.
So, I don't know if this time lost, having two round trips, is bigger than the time gained travelling for two ISL ports instead of only for one ISL port per fabric.
That is the question.
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