More diskgroup less EVA8400 performance?

[Matias Mospan]

Hello!, i'm actually planning the deploy of a SAN Solution, and need to know if the EVA8400 loss performance if it works with a large number of DiskGroup.
I think that is best to distribute the application in a large number of diskgroup so they don't have to share disk i/o, but i don't know if the HSV450 loss performance if it works with too much diskgroups

Thanks in advance!
Matias

[Steven Clementi]

The general Rule of Thumb with the EVA is that you want the least number of diskgroups as possible... maximizing your i/o potential from that disk group.

That said, Best Practice says to put all your disks into 1 Disk Group. There are reasons to split your disks though, some political, some technological.


Steven

[Bulent ILIMAN]

How many disks do you have in your EVA?

one of the concerns in an "all disks in a single group" is the protection level, you can have a maximum of double protection, if you want to have more spare disk allocation you should create a second DG. On the other hand, if you leave unused space on a single group, this can be also used as protection level.

For 2nd Generation EVA's after 100 disks in a single group performance increase with adding disks was becaming almost flatline. I am not sure about the number in 8400 but if it is a fully populated EVA I should create 2 DG,

[Taurian · Accepted solution]

Hi Matias,

You can have your own reason to create multiple Disk Groups, but you should know the best practice and try to comply with it for best results.

I am attaching the Best Practices White paper for EVA configurations. Refer to page 6 for discussion on number of Disk Groups.

Hope this helps,

Rgds,
Taurian.

[Matias Mospan]

Thanks everyone for the answers, the document attached by Taurian answer all my queestions, and more!.

[Matias Mospan]

The document "HP StorageWorks Enterprise Virtual Array configuration best practices - White Paper" answer the question.