- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- HPE EVA Storage
- >
- EVA; i/o versus MB/sec
HPE EVA Storage
1753809
Members
8052
Online
108805
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
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
тАО02-02-2007 01:00 AM
тАО02-02-2007 01:00 AM
We have an EVA5000 with a FC scsi diskgroup which contains 40 x 146GB 10k disks. According to our storage provider the system has a maximum throughput of 150MB/sec write and a 525Mb/sec read performance. Adding more disks will raise the number of write i/o per sec, but it will not raise the numberof write Mb/sec the diskgroup can process. Can anyone explain the relation between the io/sec and the Mb/sec in an EVA system.
Solved! Go to Solution.
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-02-2007 07:32 AM
тАО02-02-2007 07:32 AM
Solution
Those 'great looking' numbers are created by special test programs which have nothing to do with reality.
High I/Os are created by doing small I/Os to the same disk location so that the system just operates on the cache. High MB/s numbers are created using large sequential I/Os. Both are great to test the controller's performance (CPU, bus bandwidth), but not apply to reality.
Many installations I am aware of use a single path for data traffic and the bandwith of that one is sufficient.
High I/Os are created by doing small I/Os to the same disk location so that the system just operates on the cache. High MB/s numbers are created using large sequential I/Os. Both are great to test the controller's performance (CPU, bus bandwidth), but not apply to reality.
Many installations I am aware of use a single path for data traffic and the bandwith of that one is sufficient.
.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-03-2007 03:11 AM
тАО02-03-2007 03:11 AM
Re: EVA; i/o versus MB/sec
What Uwe said!
But let's add this:
10K RPM = 166 Revolutions per second.
So that is pretty much the maximum IO rate per second... per disk.
With 40 disks that gives 6000+ IO/sec
The EVA5000 has the compute/control power to drive say 20,000 IO/sec (dunno, must be at least that), so there is still room to spare. And adding disks may help the final performance.
For the bandwidth the above system wide number sound reasonable. On the writes the data has to go to cache and to two drives (redundancy) so you'll run into controller backplace limitations. The reads are often (fibre) channel restrictions. Well each disk can readilly deliver more then 20MB/sec. So just 25 disks will readily reach the max read throughput, you have 40. Those can deliver 2x or more MB/sec than the controller/Fibres can swallow. So more disks will not help bandwidth alone,
Now if the application does medium sized IO (8kb - 32kb) and has some randomness then you may well need more the 40 drives to get to see the MB/sec desired.
Makes sense?
Hth,
Hein van den Heuvel
HvdH Performance Consulting
But let's add this:
10K RPM = 166 Revolutions per second.
So that is pretty much the maximum IO rate per second... per disk.
With 40 disks that gives 6000+ IO/sec
The EVA5000 has the compute/control power to drive say 20,000 IO/sec (dunno, must be at least that), so there is still room to spare. And adding disks may help the final performance.
For the bandwidth the above system wide number sound reasonable. On the writes the data has to go to cache and to two drives (redundancy) so you'll run into controller backplace limitations. The reads are often (fibre) channel restrictions. Well each disk can readilly deliver more then 20MB/sec. So just 25 disks will readily reach the max read throughput, you have 40. Those can deliver 2x or more MB/sec than the controller/Fibres can swallow. So more disks will not help bandwidth alone,
Now if the application does medium sized IO (8kb - 32kb) and has some randomness then you may well need more the 40 drives to get to see the MB/sec desired.
Makes sense?
Hth,
Hein van den Heuvel
HvdH Performance Consulting
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-05-2007 12:32 AM
тАО02-05-2007 12:32 AM
Re: EVA; i/o versus MB/sec
Guys,
Thanks for the reply. The 150Mb/sec is actualy reached while copying .jpeg files from about 2MB each using several fileservers. One fileserver can write jpeg data at about 40Mb/sec. Does this mean that while using more than 4 servers at the same time the EVA will be a bottleneck?
Thanks for the reply. The 150Mb/sec is actualy reached while copying .jpeg files from about 2MB each using several fileservers. One fileserver can write jpeg data at about 40Mb/sec. Does this mean that while using more than 4 servers at the same time the EVA will be a bottleneck?
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