- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- StoreVirtual Storage
- >
- Design P4000 large LUNs for VMware?
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
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
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
02-07-2012 12:23 PM
02-07-2012 12:23 PM
Design P4000 large LUNs for VMware?
Now that vSphere 5 can handle LUN sizes up to 64TB and VAAI alleviates (or minimizes) SCSI Reservations, what are the downsides to creating large VMFS volumes on a P4000?
If all disks in a P4000 are wide-striped why does it make sense to do 3 x 1TB VMFS volumes vs 1 x 3TB volume?
Do P4000 LUN queues play a role in this design? If so, how?
Did I miss any other factors?
Thanks,
-Matt
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-07-2012 03:12 PM
02-07-2012 03:12 PM
Re: Design P4000 large LUNs for VMware?
Some drivers could be more managment related:
Snapshot schedules
remote ip copy usage
But other than that, look what vmware even states on the FAQ:
"To encourage customers to use larger and fewer datastores, in ESXi 5.0, support for Thin Provisioning VAAI primitive has been added ."
I think they added this because of the extreme example of some customer using a 1:1 ratio of vm to datastore.
I like to land somewhere in the middle. A couple of large datastores, based on snapshot schedues.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-14-2012 01:19 PM - edited 02-14-2012 01:24 PM
02-14-2012 01:19 PM - edited 02-14-2012 01:24 PM
Re: Design P4000 large LUNs for VMware?
I am new to the P4000 game but I've used VMware for quite a long time. While VMware supports large LUNs now, it's not always best practice to create large LUNs and cram a ton of vmdks on to it. Virtual disks mounted on the same vmfs volume share the same command queue. So while each individual logical disk in windows has it's on command queue (usually like 32 or 64 queue slots deep) multiple virtual machines that share the same vmfs share the same vmfs volume's command queue. While not always the easiest thing to maintain for the deepest command queues you would have c:, d:, and e: (for example) on different vmfs volumes. This also effectively isolates IO (assuming each vmfs volume is on a single LUN delivered from the SAN). If you were to put all virtual disks on the same vmfs volume, a badly behaving server/process could theoretically dominate the disk IO and by extension cause there to be issues on all other virtual machines sharing that vmfs volume. This is where enterprise plus features like Storage DRS comes in handy, taking the badly behaving virtual machine and moving it to a vmfs volume (using Storage vMotion) with less contention.