- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- StoreVirtual Storage
- >
- Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
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
тАО11-04-2010 07:44 AM
тАО11-04-2010 07:44 AM
High latency, low IO's, MBps
I have tested with IOmeter and IOSql against the servers local HD and the P4300 2 node SAN, Hd Raid5, nRaid 10.
I tested first against the local HD, then without jumbo/flow control/static trunk TRK1/ LACP/RTSP against the SAN and then with jumbo, flow control, static trunk TRK1, LACP, RTSP. In both cases teamed NICs with TLB(=ALB). First time SAN disk formatted NTFS default allocation unit size.
Random IO 32,64,128,256KB writes all better against harddisk. Random IO 8KB writes exeption 47% worse. Seq write IO's all around 22% worse. Random reading IO's small KB better (8KB 8875 344% better) over 128Kb worse, sequential IO's all worse.
Tried improving with jumbo, flowcontrol, static trunk, LACP and RSTP. Hard disk now formatted with 64KB allocation unit size. Small random writes slightly improved over 32kb random writes worse, Seeing worse performance with small random reads, improving 128KB and over. Same picture with sequential reads. See excel sheet.
I had expected to see an improvement across the board. Was I wrong to assume that?
What is the performance you are achieving? SQLIO test definition also in the excel sheet.
is there a way to monitor the HP 2910al switch perfromance?
TIA,
Fred
- Tags:
- RAID
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-04-2010 07:48 AM
тАО11-04-2010 07:48 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-04-2010 09:20 AM
тАО11-04-2010 09:20 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-04-2010 09:35 AM
тАО11-04-2010 09:35 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-04-2010 11:40 AM
тАО11-04-2010 11:40 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
In earlier threads I've read that on average 125MBps was the max, but I am not achieving that with Advanced Load Balancing.
Have a look at this link: Bonding versus MPIO performance http://blog.open-e.com/bonding-versus-mpio-explained/
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-08-2010 04:38 PM
тАО11-08-2010 04:38 PM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
This of course assumes that you have enough disks in the right RAID configuration to be able to generate 250MB of throughput.
To get more throughput to the clients, you could bond interfaces on the clients and them have them access multiple LH nodes via network raid.
In my SAN setup, all LH nodes and servers are using 802.3ad and have at least 2 bond nics.
Thanks,
Damon
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-09-2010 12:36 AM
тАО11-09-2010 12:36 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
I have a 2 node 7,2TB Starter San. Which has 2x8 HD. Still in HD Raid5 (thinking about changing that to RAID10 for performance) and nRaid10. So as a rule of thumb I've read that that should be able to produce 16x150=2400iops.
If I follow this calculation (IOPS * Number of Disks * Segment Size) / 1024 I should be able to reach 150MBps.
Did you see my SQLIO results? The max Mbps was 110,01 Mbps - 1760,16 IOps at 64KB random reading IO's. This was with 64KB allocation unit size, jumbo, flowcontrol and RSTP.
With default W2008 R2 allocation unit size, no jumbo, no flowcontrol, no RSTP it was 112,96 MBps/1807,4 IOSps. both cases ALB. So it fell.
I had expected to see an overall improvement following the Networking Best Practices Guide. The improvement is seen only with writing 8K and 32K random IO's and reading sequential. Probably due to the 64KB allocation unit size. But 64Kb random IO's writing falls. That is not what I had expected and why I am questioning my configuration. Were my assumptions of an overall improvement wrong with jumbo/flowcontrol/RSTP/static LACP trunk?
I am thinking of testing again without jumbo, and testing with HD Raid10 before deciding on the production setup.
Pointers appreciated.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-09-2010 02:39 AM
тАО11-09-2010 02:39 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
I copied the 25GB SQLio test file back over and noticed that the transfer speed doubled from 75GB to 150GB.
So I have 1/2 the spindles 8 instead of 16, but without network raid. Still the speed doubles. Is their such a high price in performance for nRaid?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-09-2010 06:43 AM
тАО11-09-2010 06:43 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
That doesn't sound correct...
I'd start by enabling SNMP on your switch, then collect interface statistics:
Packets in/out
Errors In/Out
dropped packets in/out
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-09-2010 07:16 AM
тАО11-09-2010 07:16 AM
Re: High latency, low IO's, MBps
I have just changed the HD Raid5 to Raid10. Did a SQL10 test with network Raid 0. Improvement of 8kb random write from IOs/sec 2471.28 - MBs/sec 19.30 to IOs/sec 13450.80 MBs/sec 105.08.
Volume is currently restriping will test also with network Raid 10. Expecting to see a drop again to 20 MBps.
Will try to find out how to monitor the sw2910al.