- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- MSA1000 performance increase going from A/P to A/...
Operating System - OpenVMS
1753487
Members
4448
Online
108794
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
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
Forums
Discussions
юдл
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
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
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
тАО04-12-2008 11:03 AM
тАО04-12-2008 11:03 AM
MSA1000 performance increase going from A/P to A/A fw ?
I have been asked to improve the performance of a MSA1000 in an OpenVMS 8.2 VMSCluster.
Current config.
Alpha ES47 one 2Gb HBA to external SAN SW Alpha DS40 one 2Gb HBA to same external SAN SW
External SAN SW has two fibre kables to the two ports on the MSA1000.
MSA1000 FW 4.48 dual controller each 256 Mb cache, 10 (active) disks 72 Gb 10K all RAID 1.
High IO count of size 4 and 16 blocks to very large files. ( the 16 block IO's is pt. 17 block IO's, but I will change that)
Both systems access disks, but main application runs on Alpha ES47. (failover cluster)
------------------------------------------
Options (random order)
1. Upgrade to firmware 7.0 and running A/A
2. Upgrade controller cache to 512 Mb each
3. Add 2 new HBA's and second SAN switch.
4. Upgrade the disks to 15K models.
5. Add MSA30-DB and move disks (assume pt. 4)
6. Add MSA30-DB and buy 10 extra disks.
7. Replace with MSA1500 + 2 MSA30-DB.
8. Upgrade to OpenVMS 8.3
I know some of this is free (FW 7.0, OpenVMS 8.3) and some is expensive (new 1500), but if cost is not an issue, how will you rank these in terms of performance improvement ?
How much would you expect/guess the performance will improve ?
Have you tried to run a MSA1000 A/A with OpenVMS. Are there any problems ?
Will extra cache be more needed with FW7.0 and A/A ?
What is the current status and best practise for disk IO size and alignment to MSA1000 Raid 1 volumes.
Is 2k 4k or other sizes best og is this only on EVA and Raid5 ?
Is there a way to monitor the performance of the MSA controllers?
Lars :-)
Current config.
Alpha ES47 one 2Gb HBA to external SAN SW Alpha DS40 one 2Gb HBA to same external SAN SW
External SAN SW has two fibre kables to the two ports on the MSA1000.
MSA1000 FW 4.48 dual controller each 256 Mb cache, 10 (active) disks 72 Gb 10K all RAID 1.
High IO count of size 4 and 16 blocks to very large files. ( the 16 block IO's is pt. 17 block IO's, but I will change that)
Both systems access disks, but main application runs on Alpha ES47. (failover cluster)
------------------------------------------
Options (random order)
1. Upgrade to firmware 7.0 and running A/A
2. Upgrade controller cache to 512 Mb each
3. Add 2 new HBA's and second SAN switch.
4. Upgrade the disks to 15K models.
5. Add MSA30-DB and move disks (assume pt. 4)
6. Add MSA30-DB and buy 10 extra disks.
7. Replace with MSA1500 + 2 MSA30-DB.
8. Upgrade to OpenVMS 8.3
I know some of this is free (FW 7.0, OpenVMS 8.3) and some is expensive (new 1500), but if cost is not an issue, how will you rank these in terms of performance improvement ?
How much would you expect/guess the performance will improve ?
Have you tried to run a MSA1000 A/A with OpenVMS. Are there any problems ?
Will extra cache be more needed with FW7.0 and A/A ?
What is the current status and best practise for disk IO size and alignment to MSA1000 Raid 1 volumes.
Is 2k 4k or other sizes best og is this only on EVA and Raid5 ?
Is there a way to monitor the performance of the MSA controllers?
Lars :-)
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-13-2008 04:11 AM
тАО04-13-2008 04:11 AM
Re: MSA1000 performance increase going from A/P to A/A fw ?
Hi Lars,
1. As a first pass, I would be tempted to upgrade to the latest Active/Standby release for the MSA1000, 5.20. There are some performance benefits with that version over 4.48.
2. That would probably help.
3. That will help your resilience, but not necessarily the performance.
4. Would help.
5&6. May help, if you can increase the number of LUNs, and spread them over different controller ports.
7. Wouldn't make much difference. The MSA1500 and MSA1000 are esentially the same.
For performance monitoring on the MSA1000 you need to hook up the CLI port and use the command line options...
Cheers,
Rob
1. As a first pass, I would be tempted to upgrade to the latest Active/Standby release for the MSA1000, 5.20. There are some performance benefits with that version over 4.48.
2. That would probably help.
3. That will help your resilience, but not necessarily the performance.
4. Would help.
5&6. May help, if you can increase the number of LUNs, and spread them over different controller ports.
7. Wouldn't make much difference. The MSA1500 and MSA1000 are esentially the same.
For performance monitoring on the MSA1000 you need to hook up the CLI port and use the command line options...
Cheers,
Rob
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-13-2008 06:33 PM
тАО04-13-2008 06:33 PM
Re: MSA1000 performance increase going from A/P to A/A fw ?
hi lars,
rob already got you covered on the firmwares.
But your system performance may not depend on the entire MSA. The bottle neck must be in one or more of the LUNS.
If possible, post the following output:
$ monitor disk /per
$ sho dev d
$ sho dev/full 1$
From the MSA, attach serial cable which comes with msa and run the following command :
> show tech_support
> show units
> show disks
During msa is in use, especially where you encounter slow IO performance, at the MSA turn on the performance monitoring.
> start perf
Then extracts the info and capture this output too.
> show perf
After that, to stop the performance:
> stop perf
Post all the output. Let us know.
Rgds
rob already got you covered on the firmwares.
But your system performance may not depend on the entire MSA. The bottle neck must be in one or more of the LUNS.
If possible, post the following output:
$ monitor disk /per
$ sho dev d
$ sho dev/full 1$
From the MSA, attach serial cable which comes with msa and run the following command :
> show tech_support
> show units
> show disks
During msa is in use, especially where you encounter slow IO performance, at the MSA turn on the performance monitoring.
> start perf
Then extracts the info and capture this output too.
> show perf
After that, to stop the performance:
> stop perf
Post all the output. Let us know.
Rgds
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-14-2008 05:42 AM
тАО04-14-2008 05:42 AM
Re: MSA1000 performance increase going from A/P to A/A fw ?
What are you measuring to know if the performance has improved?
What is the criteria for improvement?
Throughput - Application work units done per second or application response time or something else?
What is the criteria for improvement?
Throughput - Application work units done per second or application response time or something else?
____________________
Purely Personal Opinion
Purely Personal Opinion
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