Just keep in mind that we were using
IOMeter to test, not actual real world workloads – we were also very much
disk bound in our testing. If you are neither using IOMeter (ie, a real-world
workload) nor disk bound, I can’t foresee it being a huge problem.
We’ll be testing with NFS dedupe a
bit later today and I’ll gladly share that info if you want. Same number
of disks, so same stipulations exist.
And because the question did come up, the
VMWare server guy didn’t build the VMDKs with thin provisioning, so it
may have also impacted the testing.
Glenn
From: Daniel Keisling
[mailto:daniel.keisling@austin.ppdi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008
12:37 PM
To: Glenn Walker; Bill Holland;
toasters@mathworks.com
Subject: RE: De-dup'ing Primary
Storage
Thanks for the stats, I'll be de-duping
VMWare data soon too.
My NetApp storage tech says that read
cache peformance will increase since you're reducing the total number of actual
blocks. I have not heard of any performance degradations with A-SIS,
other than filer overhead (CPU) when SIS is actually de-duplicating. My
A-SIS schedules are during off-peak hours so it's not a concern of mine.
Daniel
From:
owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Walker
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008
9:42 AM
To: Bill Holland;
toasters@mathworks.com
Subject: RE: De-dup'ing Primary
Storage
We’ve been doing some VMWare testing
with FCP LUNs and A-SIS.
We saw a reduction from 471GB to 21GB with
only about a 7% reduction in performance. More than a fair trade-off in
my opinion.
Our testing could have had impact on the
performance more than the de-dupe, however.
Glenn
From:
owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Bill Holland
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008
6:50 AM
To: toasters@mathworks.com
Subject: De-dup'ing Primary
Storage
To those of you that have implemented Nearstore and A-SIS on your
primary storage:
1. Have you seen any difference in overall filer performance?
2. If you have LUNs, how are your space savings on those volumes?
I know that enabling Nearstore does some system tweaking in the
background to increase the number of concurrent backup streams that can be
running, but I don't know what else it tweaks that may adversely affect
performance of a primary storage system. Afterall, it was originally
designed to run as a secondary storage platform.
|
|