- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- EVA Load Balancing question
Disk Enclosures
1748134
Members
3619
Online
108758
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
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
04-10-2007 09:04 PM
04-10-2007 09:04 PM
I have an EVA-5000 with firmware 3.028 and SecurePath connected to HP-UX 11.11 Servers.
I have been looking for ways to improve performance and was wondering, does the following output show usage of both EVA controllers as part of "least IO" rule, or is controller P5849E1AAPY077 not used at all for this disk? Would allocating disks across EVA controllers show a possible performance increase?
Share and Enjoy! Ian
Server: bc999999.domain.net Report Created: Wed, Apr 11 09:51:35 2007
Command: spmgr display
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Storage: 5000-1FE1-5002-8B02
Load Balance: On Auto-restore: On Balance Policy: Least I/O
Path Verify: On Verify Interval: 30
HBAs: td0 td1
Controller: P5849E1AAPY055, Operational
P5849E1AAPY077, Operational
Devices: c20t0d0 c20t0d1 c20t0d2 c20t0d3 c20t0d4 c20t0d5 c20t0d6
TGT/LUN Device WWLUN_ID H/W_Path #_Paths
0/ 0 c20t0d0 6005-8B02-0001-3AA7-0002-0000-0050-0000 4
255/255/0/0.0
Controller Path_Instance HBA Preferred? Path_Status
P5849E1AAPY055 no
c3t0d1 td0 YES Active
c14t0d1 td1 YES Active
Controller Path_Instance HBA Preferred? Path_Status
P5849E1AAPY077 no
c5t0d1 td0 no Standby
c12t0d1 td1 no Standby
I have been looking for ways to improve performance and was wondering, does the following output show usage of both EVA controllers as part of "least IO" rule, or is controller P5849E1AAPY077 not used at all for this disk? Would allocating disks across EVA controllers show a possible performance increase?
Share and Enjoy! Ian
Server: bc999999.domain.net Report Created: Wed, Apr 11 09:51:35 2007
Command: spmgr display
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Storage: 5000-1FE1-5002-8B02
Load Balance: On Auto-restore: On Balance Policy: Least I/O
Path Verify: On Verify Interval: 30
HBAs: td0 td1
Controller: P5849E1AAPY055, Operational
P5849E1AAPY077, Operational
Devices: c20t0d0 c20t0d1 c20t0d2 c20t0d3 c20t0d4 c20t0d5 c20t0d6
TGT/LUN Device WWLUN_ID H/W_Path #_Paths
0/ 0 c20t0d0 6005-8B02-0001-3AA7-0002-0000-0050-0000 4
255/255/0/0.0
Controller Path_Instance HBA Preferred? Path_Status
P5849E1AAPY055 no
c3t0d1 td0 YES Active
c14t0d1 td1 YES Active
Controller Path_Instance HBA Preferred? Path_Status
P5849E1AAPY077 no
c5t0d1 td0 no Standby
c12t0d1 td1 no Standby
Building a dumber user
Solved! Go to Solution.
1 REPLY 1
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
04-10-2007 09:54 PM
04-10-2007 09:54 PM
Solution
Controller P5849E1AAPY077 is not used for I/Os to the virtual disk with the LUN WWN 6005-8B02-0001-3AA7-0002-0000-0050-0000.
However, the server does access this virtual disk via Fibre Channel adapters |td0| and |td1|, because you have turned on load-balancing and you see two 'Active' Paths:
c3t0d1 td0 YES Active
c14t0d1 td1 YES Active
To check if Controller P5849E1AAPY077 is owning any virtual disks - after all, Secure Path lists 6 more devices: c20t0d1 c20t0d2 c20t0d3 c20t0d4 c20t0d5 c20t0d6 - you need to go over the full list from SPMGR and check if any Active paths to that controller are visible.
If not, I would equally divide the virtual disks across both controllers. You win a second CPU for I/O processing and the second controller's cache memory (512MByte read, 256MByte write).
However, the server does access this virtual disk via Fibre Channel adapters |td0| and |td1|, because you have turned on load-balancing and you see two 'Active' Paths:
c3t0d1 td0 YES Active
c14t0d1 td1 YES Active
To check if Controller P5849E1AAPY077 is owning any virtual disks - after all, Secure Path lists 6 more devices: c20t0d1 c20t0d2 c20t0d3 c20t0d4 c20t0d5 c20t0d6 - you need to go over the full list from SPMGR and check if any Active paths to that controller are visible.
If not, I would equally divide the virtual disks across both controllers. You win a second CPU for I/O processing and the second controller's cache memory (512MByte read, 256MByte write).
.
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