- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
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
тАО11-14-2008 09:12 AM
тАО11-14-2008 09:12 AM
We are having HP Unix 11.23 is running on HP Integrity servers which all are connected to SAN. Some servers are rx6600 having internal SAS Disks and some are rx7640 having internal SCSI Disks.
scsi_max_qdepth is given as 8. One of my colleque told me that Increasing scsi_max_qdepth will make performance degradation for Internal disks (SAS & SCSI) and it is only intended for luns which are presented through SAN.
I know through scsictl command i can change the respective luns queue_depth. If i change the value to 64 through scsictl command will it work as scsi_max_qdepth kerenel parameter is still 8.
Manoj K
Manoj K
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-25-2008 11:10 AM
тАО11-25-2008 11:10 AM
Solutionwhatever value you set with scsictl only affects the single lun in question, so it'd be perfectly fine to set it for SAN luns to assume that the SAS disks will be unaffected.
That aside - I usually check with the vendor documentation, i.e. some EMC Midrange arrays only supported a value of 128, and most older SCSI disks only support a queue depth of 31.
8 is a "safe default" for disks from the 4.3GB era and I can't understand why it should DEGRADE local disk performance, usually I experience the very opposite - a slight performance increase and also load decrease. One of the current SAS disks selling points over the SATA counterparts is the extended queue depth and the performance benefits thereof!
In any case always REALLY check the vendor recommended values and don't ever run the disk with a higher depth than supported or you will be generating a lot of error messages in the STM logfiles.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-25-2008 12:28 PM
тАО11-25-2008 12:28 PM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
However, with scsictl the change is not persistent across reboots. So you need to write a startup script that will do the scsictl at each boot.
Olivier.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-29-2008 11:47 PM
тАО11-29-2008 11:47 PM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
Manoj K
Manoj K
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-15-2009 03:56 PM
тАО02-15-2009 03:56 PM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
I took a moment to look up vendor manuals for those 18k/10k disks in the server, and checked versus the scsictl reported queue depths.
They were all set at a depth of '8' whereas the vendors (prior to firmware replacement by HP, I'll admit) specified them at 64/128 tags depth. I changed it and took off 10% off the disk usage. Of course I also fixed the launch times for the cron jobs, but still I was midly surprised - WHY does HP not properly set those values on supported disks, and why did I never know how much of an impact it actually makes!
Keep tuning till it breaks,
Florian
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-17-2009 03:31 AM
тАО02-17-2009 03:31 AM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
Still HP did not given any clear reply regarding this query as i have asked them directly with our customer id(HP is always saying our company is prestigious customer of them in our region).As per hp, increasing scsi_max_qdepth value may help.
In some extend what i have understood is that HP wants to hide something from the customer.
Manoj K
Manoj K
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-17-2009 06:24 AM
тАО02-17-2009 06:24 AM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
I don't think so.
HPUX just opted for 'safe', working setting.
You have the option to improve on that.
This particular parameter is really VERY dependent on what is 'hiding' behind the LUN.
I write hiding, because there is no practical way to tell how deep you can go. There can be 1 disk behind a lun, or 100. There can be 64 MB cache shared with 8 luns, or 8 GB cache.
I think there is room in the scsi protocal to negotiate the maximum reasonable depth for a controller, but that controller may well be used fom multiple hosts. How would you propose that those hosts, which need not be able to communicate, negotiate which slice of the IO pie they are entitled to ?!
And... it's a good knob to know for Performance Consultants like myself :-).
Hein
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО02-22-2009 01:05 AM
тАО02-22-2009 01:05 AM
Re: scsictl & scsi_max_qdepth
Please don't be upset with the word "HP wants to hide something from the customer".
In Our environment more than 90% of the servers are from HP. Storage is HP EVA.
The application we are running on the servers are ORACLE and T24 Core banking systems and they are HP's partners.
Regarding the performance issue HP has collected all the details from the servers still they were not sure about the scsi_max_qdepth kerenel parameter.
Manoj K
Manoj K