Disk Enclosures
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

 
Highlighted
Regular Advisor

Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Dear all,
We have Two site A and B, now we have made it EVA4400 DR replication. we had tested physically coping data TWO site . 1GB just 22mints . We are coping Data through EVA9.1 it's taking 1GB around 10hrs. what is the problem both site ping just 15ms. link speed 6MB /ps . i have a doubt what is That WRITE MODE Synchronous Asynchronous. which option can i do it ?
17 REPLIES 17
Highlighted
Honored Contributor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Subash, understanding from your question is that you are newbie to EVA and Continuous-Access.

SYNC or ASYNC replication will make significant impact to hosts those are accessing the Primary-Volume (source at site A) but will sync operation depends upon network bandwidth and also on how busy the EVAs are.

For the begining I will recommend you to run the ping command side-by-side when you are syncing the volume and see if there are changes in response time. For the second test, ask the network administrtor whether there is any restrictions set in the network (QOS) and also to monitor the network utilization while sync is running. Third, check with EVAPerf how busy the EVAs are (you have to search this forum for EVAPerf usage and syntex or read the manual.. that's why it's third in the list).

Hope that helps.
Highlighted
Trusted Contributor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Pls confirm the XCS Version of the EVA 4400 and the firmware of SAN Switches.

Does the 6MB Line is a dedicated for the replication part.
Necessity breaks iron
Highlighted
Regular Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Thanks for replay me.

Our EVA4400 Firmware version XCS 9522000
FC switch firmware ver 5.01.02 . we have 40 gb data now replications is going on both site. every 12hrs 1% has been completed . but physical copy 1gb with in 22mints . we have 6mb detected line what can i do ?

Highlighted
Occasional Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Hi everyone

We're 3 customers litteraly fighting with HP support (level 3 and local HP techs) to get EVA4400 do asynchronous replication over an ethernet link (fiber channel)

After 4 months of tests on 2 EVA installed for test purpose by HP, HP conclusion is that EVA4400 can't do asynchronous replication !!!

Why buy such expensive hardware and software (2 continuous access licences + 2 FCIP / MPX converter) if the main purpose of these products aren't usable ?

HP response to that : you need to have a 10ms jitter to be able to do asynchronous replication

Problem : 10ms jitter is the exact opposite of an asynchronous link

I don't even mention controller hangs and the lack of alerts and fault tolerance. This product is clarly not ready for public use, and for 50 kâ ¬, it's a shame !!!

Highlighted
Regular Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

Hi LAURENT,

we have a critical problem we use mpx110 gatways and HP CA for replication with 6mbits WAN speed,
the big problem happend with many VMware machine hosted on EVA4400 and not responing for seconds then back again
this occured when we establish the replication.

we open case whith HP and still we didnt find the solution.
any explation for your case is it related to performance issue
Highlighted
Occasional Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

hi!

It is not related to performance issues.

HP wants to make us believe that the trouble comes from replication link but it is not.

A asynchronous product must be able to handle an asynchronous link.

BTW we were able to reproduce the same erros (ping time response, VM freezes ...) on our LAN (yes you read correctly : asynchronous replication hangs on a gigabit LAN and 2 EVA4400 side by side)

this product is not able to make what it is sold for, and HP just doesn't bring any solution (except an exchange for iscsi lefhanded product, great !!!)
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

It sounds like this has been officially escalated, but I would ask for that if not. Otherwise, I would show someone (salesperson) the official HP documentation that says the 4400 is supposed to do what it was sold to you to do, and if it does not, replace it at no cost to a model that does. HP WILL do that if you apply enough pressure.
check out evamgt.wetpaint.com and evamgt google group
Highlighted
Occasional Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

> It sounds like this has been officially escalated, but I would ask for that if not.

yes it has
to level 3
october 19 2009 : a CPM (complex problem manager) has been designated to handle the 3 cases open at CA EVA / FCIP (mpx) and RSM specialists
decembre 2009 : 2 tests EVA4400 in place to reproduce the problem and solve it

january 2010 : techniciens gave up => commercial proposition to replace theses EVA4400 fiber with 2 lefthanded iscsi products ;-(

february 2010 : still no proposition after a month ... nobody answer anymore

>Otherwise, I would show someone (salesperson) the official HP documentation that says the 4400 is supposed to do what it was sold to you to do, and if it does not, replace it at no cost to a model that does. HP WILL do that if you apply enough pressure.

we already do that
but on FCIP mpx110 the asynchronous replication is associated with a 10ms jitter preconisation => impossible and in contradiction with the meaning of asynchronous

and of course during theses 4 months HP hasn't be able to show us a single working configuration with 2 EVA4400 doing asynchronous replication
Highlighted
Frequent Advisor

Re: Eva 4400 DR performance very slow

I have the same issue here.

HP Level 3 support has advised me to change from Port based routing to Exchange based routing and the current firmware on the EVA4400 is 09534000, still no luck.

I have actually advised them to read through this forum, but they have no comment and keep reffering me back to the SAN Design guide. Which is not helping.

If its true, do we have evidence that the EVA4400 cannot do async replication?

And lastly, has anyone managed to get this working?