- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- MSA Storage
- >
- Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
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
тАО05-10-2007 06:10 PM
тАО05-10-2007 06:10 PM
Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
Any of you has a benchmark among ds2405 ou the new ds2500 versus MSA1000 and EVA ?
If not and considering only performance ... what could we estimate for that ?
Regards
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-11-2007 01:57 AM
тАО05-11-2007 01:57 AM
Re: Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
How do you define 'performance', by the way?
- MegaBytes per second?
- I/Os per second?
- price per GigaByte?
- ...
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-11-2007 03:33 AM
тАО05-11-2007 03:33 AM
Re: Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
We think about iops and specially MB/sec .
I Know that the products are differents and to give more details ...we are considering JBOD with MirrorDisk/UX versus MSA or EVA use in the SMB market ... is it clear ?
Regards
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-11-2007 04:12 AM
тАО05-11-2007 04:12 AM
Re: Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
Due to their caches they can provide higher peak performances than JBODs.
But, if you are looking for storage for a single server you will get much better price/performance with JBODs but without any features like chache, remote replication etc.
At the end of the day if you are lookking for high performance the number of spindles, interfaces (FC/SCS) and HBAs (FC/SCS) is crutial.
As long as you do not hit the ceiling of any component (Array controller, interface, HBA eetc) you will roughly get the same performances with the same amount of disks.
Cheers
Peter
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-14-2007 03:17 AM
тАО05-14-2007 03:17 AM
Re: Performance comparisons (JBOD versus Arrays )
I will have to point our though that if you go the route of JBODs - be sure to stripe and mirror (or mirror and stripe) using your host volume manager -- I recommend VxVM as you can have layered volumes and hot-sparing built-in. This is particularly true if your usage of JBODs will be for very write/update intensive applications.
But for general file storage, RAID5 with hot spares should do... BUT A WARNING THOUGH!! - Do not ever set up RAID5's with disks that are large -- i.e. 300GB disks upwards as sparing and parity rebuild can take a long time and double disk failures will certainly be risky...