Perf EMC VNX5100 vs IBM DS5300 Eng
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Perf EMC VNX5100 vs IBM DS5300 Eng

on

  • 10,866 views

Сравнение_производительности_СХД_EMC_VNX5100_vs._IBM_DS5300

Сравнение_производительности_СХД_EMC_VNX5100_vs._IBM_DS5300

Statistics

Views

Total Views
10,866
Views on SlideShare
10,848
Embed Views
18

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
125
Comments
0

1 Embed 18

http://www.linkedin.com 18

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Perf EMC VNX5100 vs IBM DS5300 Eng Perf EMC VNX5100 vs IBM DS5300 Eng Presentation Transcript

    • A comparison of storage performanceEMC VNX 5100 vs. IBM DS5300 2011
    • A comparison of storage performance EMC VNX 5100 vs. IBM DS5300 1. Configuration of test data storage systems:EMC VNX 5100 4GB RAM per controller 15K RPM 3.5” 600GBIBM DS5300 8GB RAM per controller 15K RPM 3.5” 300GB I hasten to note that EMC VNX 5100 is the lowest model of EMCs midrange, and the IBM DS5300 is the oldest model in the IBM midrange (but already old and willbe replaced in the product line - IBM Storwize V7000). Among the advantages of IBM DS5300 in the tested configuration is much more memory - 8GB vs. 4GB in EMC VNX 5100. Besides, IBM DS5300 almost all of thismemory is used for the cache, while at EMC VNX 5100 more than ¾ of memory used specifically for the needs of FLARE operating system and only the remaining small areaavailable for the cache. Another important difference - from the host with the AIX operating system for a logical drive:IBM DS5300 supports a maximum queue_depth = 256EMC VNX 5100 supports maximum queue_depth = 64 On the other hand, since for both systems will be used is identical to the volume of the test area (~ 1.2TB), and the capacity of the drives installed in the tested EMCVNX 5100 is twice as high than the IBM DS 5300 - the results of performance EMC VNX 5100 will have a positive impact so-called short stroking* effect .* short stroking - reducing the access time from HDD, due to the shorter moving magnetic heads, when used for storage only of the available space on the HDDComparison of the performance will be held on the following types of raid groups: R10, R5 and R6. As the load profile will be used 100% Random with a ratio of R/W = 80/20(typical load for the database) and the linear read/write (typical load for backup/restore). 2. When comparing the performance of the raid group R10 was used the following configuration:EMC VNX 5100 one raid group R10 (4+4)IBM DS5300 one raid group R10 (4+4)
    • 2.1. Results of testing with a load of 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.2.1a. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.2.1b. latency, ms 2500 12 R10 R10 64 I/O treads 10 64 I/O treads 2000 100%Random 100%Random R/W=80/20 8 R/W=80/20 1500 EMC VNX 5100 (8x15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 (8x15K 3.5"IOPS 6 HDD) cache 128MBRead HDD) cache 128MBRead 1000 673MBWrite 673MBWrite 4 EMC VNX 5100 (8x15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 (8x15K 3.5" 500 HDD) cache 476MBRead HDD) cache 476MBRead 2 325MBWrite (default) 325MBWrite (default) 0 IBM DS5300 (8x15K 3.5" 0 IBM DS5300 (8x15K 3.5" 4K 8K HDD) 4K 8K HDD) 32K 64K 32K 64K 256K 256K block size block sizeFor EMC VNX 5100 were tested two versions of the cache settings:- default - 476MB cache to write and 325MB read cache (for each SP)- optimized version - 673MB cache to write and 128MB read cache (for each SP) The diagrams presented above shows that the optimized version in comparison with the default settings significantly increases performance. Therefore, all subsequent testsfor EMC VNX 5100 to use this version of the configuration cache.IBM DS5300 does not allow such manipulation of the cache settings - so a similar optimization could be carried out.
    • 2.2. The results of testing at a load of 512 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.2.2A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.2.2B. latensy, ms R10 R10 2500 512 I/O treads 12 512 I/O treads 100%Random 10 100%Random 2000 R/W=80/20 R/W=80/20 8 1500 IOPS EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 6 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 1000 HDD HDD 4 500 2 0 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 0 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 4K HDD 4K HDD 8K 32K 8K 32K 64K 256K 64K 256K block size block sizeAs can be seen from the above chart, the increase in the number of I/O processes from 64 to 512 does not increase the productivity of any of the storage system - the effectis extremely small number of HDD, used in testing. Therefore, further restrict the maximum 64 I/O processes for testing.
    • 2.3. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.2.3A. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.2.3B. In my opinion, the chart 2.3B quite clearly show differences in the capacity of back-end interface used in data storage (using two such interfaces on both the Beck-end storage offset by write penalty = 2 for R10): - 4Gbps FC at IBM DS5300 - 6Gbps SAS at EMC VNX 5100 800 R10 800 R10 700 sequentialread 700 sequential write 600 600 500 500MBps 400 MBps 400 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 300 HDD 300 HDD 200 200 100 100 0 0 1 I/O IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 2 I/O 1 I/O 2 I/O 4 I/O HDD 4 I/O HDD 8 I/O 8 I/O I/O process I/O process
    • 3. When comparing the performance of the raid groups R5 used the following configuration raid groups:EMC VNX 5100 one raid group R5 (7+1)IBM DS5300 one raid group R5 (7+1) 3.1. Results of testing with a load of 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.3.1A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.3.1B. latensy, ms R5 R5 2000 64 I/O treads 12 64 I/O treads 100%Random 100%Random 1500 R/W=80/20 10 R/W=80/20 8 IOPS 1000 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 6 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" HDD 4 HDD 500 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" HDD 2 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 0 0 HDD 4K 8K 4K 8K 32K 64K 32K 64K 256K 256K block size block size
    • 3.2. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.3.2A. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.3.2.B. Both storage systems using R5, expected better results demonstrate the sequential read/write than when using R10. 800 R5 800 R5 700 sequential Read 700 sequential Write 600 600 500 500MBps 400 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" MBps 400 HDD EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 300 300 HDD IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 200 HDD 200 100 100 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" HDD 0 0 1 2 1 2 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • 4. When comparing the performance of the raid groups R6 used the following configuration raid-groups:EMC VNX 5100 one raid group R6 (6+2)IBM DS5300 one raid group R6 (6+2) 4.1. Results of testing with a load of 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.4.1A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.4.1B. 4.2. latensy, ms R6 R6 2500 64 I/O treads 12 64 I/O treads 100%Random 10 100%Random 2000 R/W=80/20 R/W=80/20 8 1500 IOPS EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 6 HDD EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 1000 4 HDD IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 500 2 HDD IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 0 0 HDD 4K 8K 4K 8K 32K 64K 32K 64K 256K 256K block size block size
    • 4.2. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.4.2A. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording presented at diagr.4.2B.4.3. 800 R6 800 R6 700 sequential Read 700 sequential Write 600 600 500 500MBps 400 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" MBps 400 HDD EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 300 300 HDD IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" 200 HDD 200 100 100 IBM DS5300 8x 15K 3.5" HDD 0 0 1 2 1 2 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • 5. Actually testing the performance of the two storage systems here and would come to its logical conclusion. But ... there gave us a EMC distributor for EMC VNX 5100 a couple of SSD, with a capacity of ~ 100GB each. And in the present storage license for EMC FAST Cache. So on the next chapter of this review. I have already previously in use EFD Storage EMC, but these were STEC SSD production line of ZeusIOPS, based on the SLC-memory and are known not only for itshigh productivity, but at least its high cost. They were previously used in EMC and Symmetrix line and in the line of CLARiiON.In EMC VNX same applies enterprise SSD another manufacturer (ie Samsung), also based on the SLC-memory, but offered at a more affordable price (compared to STECZeusIOPS). This SSD utilizes SATA connector interface (3Gbps) and is made in the form factor of 3.5 ".First, examine the speed capabilities of SSD, and then look at how to grow the performance of disk raid group when using FAST Cache.
    • 5.1 In order to evaluate the performance of SSD, from 2xSSD was created raid group R1. Test results for SSD with a load of 16 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20, R/W = 0/100, R/W = 100/0 are shown in diagr.5.1A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.5.1B. latensy, ms R1 12 R1 IOPS 16 I/O treads 16 I/O treads 10 100%Random 100%Random 20000 R/W=80/20 8 EMC VNX 5100 2x SSD 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 2x 3.5" SSD 15000 HDD R/W=80/20 R/W=80/20 6 10000 EMC VNX 5100 2xSSD 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 2x 3.5" SSD R/W=0/100 4 R/W=0/100 5000 EMC VNX 5100 2xSSD 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 2x 3.5" SSD R/W=100/0 2 R/W=100/0 0 0 4K 8K 32K 64K 256K block size block size
    • 5.2. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.5.2A. The results of testing under load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.5.2B. R1 (1+1) SSD R1 (1+1) SSD 800 sequential Read 800 sequential Write 600 600 400 400MBps MBps 200 EMC VNX 5100 2x 3.5" SSD 200 EMC VNX 5100 2x 3.5" SSD 0 0 1 2 1 2 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • 6. We now turn to testing the Fast Cache - compare results obtained earlier performance on the 5100 EMC VNX 8hHDD without FAST Cache with the results obtained during activation Fast Cache. The effect of the Fast Cache does not appear immediately, it takes time to "hot" data had been cached - this time interval is usually referred to as "warming up" the cache (Cache Warm-Up). This feature concerning caches in general (high volume), not just EMC FAST Cache. I note that the activation of the Fast Cache uses the cache RAM read/write (and so small.) Features associated with activation and deactivation of FAST Cache are shown in the screenshots below
    • 6.1 Test Results R10 with a load of 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.6.1A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.6.1B latensy, ms R10 R10 20000 64 I/O treads 12 64 I/O treads 100%Random 10 100%Random 15000 R/W=80/20 R/W=80/20 8IOPS EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 10000 6 HDD HDD 4 5000 2 EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" 0 0 HDD with FAST Cache HDD with FAST Cache 4K 8K 4K 8K (2xSSD R1) after 30min 32K 64K (2xSSD R1) after 30min 32K 64K 256K 256K Cache Warm-Up Cache Warm-Up block size block size
    • 6.2 Outcome of testing under load R10 with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.6.2A. Test Results R10 with a load of 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.6.2B. 800 R10 800 R10 700 sequential Read 700 sequential Write 600 600 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 500 500 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" HDD HDDMBps 400 MBps 400 300 300 200 200 EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" 100 HDD with FAST Cache 100 EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" (2xSSD R1) after 30min HDD with FAST Cache 0 0 Cache Warm-Up (2xSSD R1) after 30min 1 2 1 2 Cache Warm-Up 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • 6.3 Results of testing with a load R5 with 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.6.3A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown in the diagram. 6.3B. latensy, ms R5 R5 20000 64 I/O treads 14 64 I/O treads 100%Random 12 100%Random 15000 R/W=80/20 10 R/W=80/20IOPS 8 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 10000 HDD HDD 6 5000 4 2 EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" 0 0 HDD with FAST Cache HDD with FAST Cache 4K 8K 4K 8K (2xSSD R1) after 30min 32K 64K (2xSSD R1) after 30min 32K 64K 256K 256K Cache Warm-Up Cache Warm-Up block size block size
    • 6.4 Results of testing with a load R5 with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.6.4A. Results of testing with a load R5 with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.6.4B. 800 R5 800 R5 700 sequential Read 700 sequential Write 600 600 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 500 HDD 500 HDDMBps 400 MBps 400 300 300 200 200 EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" EMC VNX5100 8x 15K 3.5" 100 HDD with FAST Cache 100 HDD with FAST Cache 0 (2xSSD R1) after 30min 0 (2xSSD R1) after 30min Cache Warm-Up Cache Warm-Up 1 2 1 2 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • 6.5 Test Results R6 load with 64 I/O processes for the block size 4KB, 8KB, 32KB, 64KB, 256KB at 100% random and load ratio R/W = 80/20 are shown in diagr.6.5A. The corresponding response time of the disk subsystem at the time of testing shown on diagr.6.5B. latensy, ms R6 R6 20000 64 I/O treads 12 64 I/O treads 100%Random 10 100%Random 15000 R/W=80/20 R/W=80/20 8 10000 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 6 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5"IOPS HDD HDD 4 5000 2 0 0 4K EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 4K EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 8K 32K 8K 32K 64K HDD with FAST Cache 64K HDD with FAST Cache 256K 256K (2xSSD R1) after 30min (2xSSD R1) after 30min block size Cache Warm-Up block size Cache Warm-Up
    • 6.6 Test Results R6 load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes in a linear reading presented at diagr.6.6A. Test results R6 load with 1/2/4/8 I/O processes on linear recording shown in diagr.6.6B.6.7 800 R6 800 R6 700 sequential Read 700 sequential Write 600 600 500 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 500 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" HDD HDDMBps 400 MBps 400 300 300 200 200 100 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" 100 EMC VNX 5100 8x 15K 3.5" HDD with FAST Cache HDD with FAST Cache 0 (2xSSD R1) after 30min 0 (2xSSD R1) after 30min 1 2 Cache Warm-Up 1 2 Cache Warm-Up 4 8 4 8 I/O process I/O process
    • application- All the tested storage systems were connected to the same LPAR with AIX 6.1 TL6 SP4- From the host connection used by FC 8Gbps- We used a JFS2 file system with inline log- The file system as a working set of files were created, the total size of ~ 1.2TB- To create a load test was used package nstress, in particular utility ndisk64 - To collect and process information about the response time of storage used by utilities NMON and NMON Analyserrespectively Oleg Korol it-expert@ukr.net