- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- Disk Size to Performance
-
- Forums
-
Blogs
- Alliances
- Around the Storage Block
- Behind the scenes @ Labs
- HPE Careers
- HPE Storage Tech Insiders
- Infrastructure Insights
- Inspiring Progress
- Internet of Things (IoT)
- My Learning Certification
- OEM Solutions
- Servers: The Right Compute
- Shifting to Software-Defined
- Telecom IQ
- Transforming IT
- Infrastructure Solutions German
- L’Avenir de l’IT
- IT e Trasformazione Digitale
- Enterprise Topics
- ИТ для нового стиля бизнеса
- Blogs
-
Quick Links
- Community
- Getting Started
- FAQ
- Ranking Overview
- Rules of Participation
- Contact
- Email us
- Tell us what you think
- Information Libraries
- Integrated Systems
- Networking
- Servers
- Storage
- Other HPE Sites
- Support Center
- Enterprise.nxt
- Marketplace
- Aruba Airheads Community
-
Forums
-
Blogs
-
InformationEnglish
- 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
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-24-2008 09:46 AM
01-24-2008 09:46 AM
Disk Size to Performance
For Eg: do you recommend creating one large 2TB LUN or multiple smaller LUNs to be assigned to one server.
Thanks,
Sajeev
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-24-2008 10:14 AM
01-24-2008 10:14 AM
Re: Disk Size to Performance
But you could get performance benefits from the operating system perspective, if you have more than one LUN, as cache/queues are asignes in a per LUN basis.
If where up to me, I would create 500 GB LUNs.
You should also consider your backup strategy.
If you can, try to put read-only information in a separate LUN, so you can backup this less frequently.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-24-2008 10:19 AM
01-24-2008 10:19 AM
Re: Disk Size to Performance
I would recommend smaller size luns ( around 500Gb for your conf ) , because luns will be distributed among controller, more easy administration task, more easy backup administration, queu depth settings and more.
Hasan.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-24-2008 10:34 AM
01-24-2008 10:34 AM
Re: Disk Size to Performance
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-24-2008 11:02 AM
01-24-2008 11:02 AM
Re: Disk Size to Performance
The more the better. The bigger the fire hose the faster the water is delivered. Here are some areas that you can control to get faster delivery.
File system block size. Bigger blocks mean less work for the transfer.
Stripping across spindles and disks. The more spindles the less work to perform when read / writting.
HBA's. Get as many as possible on both server and disk array and round robin the HBA
s (* pri > alt alt > pri *) to balance evenly across the HBA's.
Raid 1 is faster than Raid 5. Put your database on raid 5 and your archive logs on raid 1.
Use one disk group in the disk array. Especially if you're limited by only two HBA controllers.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise International
- Communities
- HPE Blogs and Forum
© Copyright 2019 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP