- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
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
тАО06-04-2002 09:54 AM
тАО06-04-2002 09:54 AM
SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
I'v e added 3 more disks but this has changed the performance recommendation.
The Working Set 0.100
How do I spread the I/O across the new disks?
Do I have to create a new LUN and migrate (pvmove) data to it?
Thanks for your time and consideration
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 10:04 AM
тАО06-04-2002 10:04 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
In order to reduce the queue length, you're going to need to redistribute your data, spreading it across more drives. So yes, create more LUNs and move some of the data into them.
HTH,
Pete
Pete
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 10:06 AM
тАО06-04-2002 10:06 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 10:09 AM
тАО06-04-2002 10:09 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
Pete
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 10:20 AM
тАО06-04-2002 10:20 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 11:59 AM
тАО06-04-2002 11:59 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
Here's my plan:
I've got one lvol spread across 4 8GB Luns. The luns were created while we had 4 diskin th array.
So I created a 32 GB Lun which should be spread across all the disk in the Array.
I added the Lun to the VolumeGroup and will be doing a pvmove from each of the 4 8GB Luns to the 32 GB Lun.
I'm not sure what going from 4 Luns to 1 Lun will do, because I'm picking up more spindles even though it looks like fewere disks.
will let you know how it turns out.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 01:42 PM
тАО06-04-2002 01:42 PM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
I've noticed some minimal activity on the new disks. Overall the Qlen being reported by glance are greatly reduced even though the Luns are reported as 100% Utilization.
In any case I'm going to let the 12H percolate overnight and seee how it looks in the morning
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-04-2002 01:46 PM
тАО06-04-2002 01:46 PM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
AutoRAID's don't work like that at all. Regardless of the number of disks that were in the array when a LUN was created it will automatically balance across all the available disks. You absolutely, positively cannot say that LUN3 for example is spread across Disks 1A, 3B, 5A, and 5B. You have no control whatsoever of the physical layout of the data.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-05-2002 03:25 AM
тАО06-05-2002 03:25 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
After doing some research so I don't end up sticking my foot in my mouth again, I can offer this excerpt from the AutoRAID User's Guide in support of what Clay has been saying:
Increasing the amount of RAID 0/1 space available
If the write working set is exceeding the amount of available RAID 0/1 space, you can restore performance by increasing the amount of RAID 0/1 space. You can do this in one of the following ways:
. Include a disk and leave its capacity unallocated. This is an effective way of permanently increasing the amount of RAID 0/1 space available for the write working set.
. Delete an unneeded existing logical drive (LUN) and leave its capacity unallocated. This too will permanently increase the amount of RAID 0/1 space available for the write working set.
. Add a disk and create a new logical drive (LUN) with its capacity. This is a temporary way of increasing the amount of available RAID 0/1 space. As the new logical drive begins to fill up with data, it will be converted to RAID 5 space and you may again find that the available 10 percent RAID 0/1 minimum is too small to accomodate the write working set.
Clay's suggestion (the first bullet) is obviously the best idea in the long run. Mine (the third bullet) *MIGHT* offer temporary relief only.
Good luck,
Pete
Pete
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-06-2002 06:39 AM
тАО06-06-2002 06:39 AM
Re: SureStore 12H Disk Array performance question
The only issue I have is that when I look at the 12H the orginal six disk are flashing like crazy. While the three new disks flash occaionally, once or twice every three seconds.
I didn't change the orginal configuration 4 8GB Luns (split across two controllers) assigned to a single Lvol and a 20GB Lun assigned to a second Lvol. Adding three disk appears to have greatly reduced the disk queing(req Queue) reported by glance/PerfView. It has done nothing to reduce the disk queueing reported by the 12H.
Adding more disk to the 12H shouldn't have impacted the 12 raid1/raid5 performance as the "working set size" was .1 and "relocate blocks " was 0 before the disk add.
The idea was to reduce the 12H internal queueing making the array service the I/O faster. According to the 12H stats, the SCSI Queueing is about the same. The disk queueing reported by the OS is reduced.
At the end of the day the only concern is mine as why aren't these new disk doing more work?
Thanks again for your consideration.