Learning Network stuff at Brocade TechSummit in Prague :)

storage_vs_network

Advertisements

Performance testing pitfalls with artificial load generators

Since I’ve now written few posts about NetApp, it is time to switch gears. While I am quite noob with Nutanix, I’d like share something about Nutanix as well.

I received a demo unit from Nutanix a while go. One way to get familiar with a product is to put some load on to it and see what happens.

Because I am going to show some performance figures and Nutanix EULA forbids publishing benchmarking results, I am not going to disclose the configuration of the Nutanix box. This way performance figures are just numbers, not benchmarking results and hopefully I am not breaching the EULA. Furthermore without disclosing all the workload parameters and the configuration of the box, metrics such as “IOPS” and “Latency” are just numbers without relevance and should not be used in any comparisons with other products. Continue reading “Performance testing pitfalls with artificial load generators”

NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition V2, part 4

In the final instalment of this series, I’ll have a look at AFF setups that have about the same usable capacity, but are built out of different set of SSD drives. Both are using ADPv2 to maximize usable capacity.

This is also the point where things get little bit hairy.

In previous posts I was comparing apples to apples in hardware terms, the only difference was version of ADP used, solutions under comparison were equal in terms of total cost and performance.  Since ADPv2 is more efficient, you can lower $/GB without altering total cost or performance, making AFF more cost effiecient, you get more bang for your buck.

This time I am comparing apples to oranges in hardware terms. Using different hardware components makes comparison more complex, it is not just about usable capacity, different hardware has also different performance characteristics and total cost. I am not going to touch performance aspect too much as it would overcomplicate the comparison.

Continue reading “NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition V2, part 4”

NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 3

In previous posts I wrote about AFF and ADPv2 with 12 SSD disks, you can find these two entries here and here

With AFF product family ADPv2 supports slicing up to 48 SSD disks. Let’s investigate larger setups, starting with 24 SSD disk setups.

Continue reading “NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 3”

NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 2

In previous part 1 I wrote about NetApp AFF and ADP with smaller 400 GB SSD drives. This time I will concentrate on ADPv2 with larger SSD drives (3,8TB). As a reminder, with ADPv2 you can deploy 12 SSD disk setups while still having two data aggregates and two controllers serving data and thus getting better performance. So ADPv2 with 12 SSD drives is beneficial also with larger SSD drives.

Continue reading “NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 2”

NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 1

NetApp has announced new version of their storage operating system, Ontap 9. One of the improved features is Advanced Drive Partition V2 (ADPv2).

With ADP you can slice SDDs or HDDs into two partitions, one for root aggregates and one for data aggregates. This means that you don’t have to reserve separate drives for root aggregates, instead you can use a small “slice” of disk for root aggregate and use remaining “slice” for data aggregates. By using ADP the overhead related to root aggregates is smaller and you will get more usable space for data.

Continue reading “NetApp AFF and Advanced Drive Partition v2, part 1”