I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions: 1) Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__*
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't help if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault tolerance, IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
We use MSCS on top of VMWare because our customers use MSCS, and we need to test our software with MSCS as well as develop for MSCS, but we would rather not dedicate physical hardware to it, just like we'd rather not dedicate physical hardware to anything.
Plus the HA feature in VMWare is an add-on cost for non enterprise environments, and people may have free/cheap licenses for MSCS due to arrangements with Microsoft that they may not have with VMWare.
Thanks, Matt
-- Matthew Zito Chief Scientist GridApp Systems P: 646-452-4090 mzito@gridapp.com http://www.gridapp.com
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com on behalf of Glenn Walker Sent: Sat 10/27/2007 7:17 PM To: M. Vaughn Stewart; Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: A-SIS questions
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't help if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault tolerance, IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
I was led to believe that VMotion was vastly different (good for unplanned failure/non reboot type failover).
Thanks for the clarification.
From what I've seen in the past, MSCS will still cause service stoppage for some applications (akin to reboot) and is a rather nasty 'application' to support if there is low-level failure. When it runs, it runs well - when it fails, it fails miserably.
Glenn
________________________________
From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Scott Lowe Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 9:36 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: A-SIS questions
VMotion is great for planned maintenance or planned downtime, but won't work for unplanned issues.
VMware HA provides stateless failover (i.e., reboot) of workloads in the event of unplanned hardware failure.
MSCS provides stateful failover in the event of unplanned hardware issues, which neither VMotion nor VMware HA can provide today.
Until VMware Continuous Availability (demoed at VMworld 2007) is made available, MSCS is the only solution discussed thus far that can provide stateful failover of workloads.
-- Scott
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com on behalf of Glenn Walker Sent: Sat 10/27/2007 7:17 PM To: M. Vaughn Stewart; Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: A-SIS questions
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't help if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault tolerance, IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't help if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault tolerance, IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
dom docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
Phil,
The market offers many data deduplication technologies, most of which run at the server level, may or may not dedupe the production data set, and typically incur a performance penalty when enabled.
A-SIS runs on the array, deduplicates the prodcution data set, and incurs minimal system overhead. in addition, de-duplicated data sets can be replciated in their deduplicated state providing storage savings on the prodcution and remote data sets.
As I know you are aware that with any technology one should should follow best practices to ensure optimal results. I was about to ask you about your business challenges, but I noticed that as your are with EMC so I'd suspect that your business challenges aren't focused on reducing storage costs.
Maybe we could find a customer who would like to compare the benefits of A-SIS vs Avamar in a head to head evaluation where we could share the results on toasters! Would you be interested in working together to pull this off?
Vaughn Stewart
On 10/30/07, Fote_Philip@emc.com Fote_Philip@emc.com wrote:
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
Hi All
sorry but I disagree with the cited "minimal system impact" that Vaughn cites talking about A-SIS. When we think to dedup processes in a Nearstore VTL appliance I can also accept the high overhead on CPU that this causes because in a "backup" environment we can also accept that this process slows the general I/O values but, as long NetApp offer the choice in the FAS appliances and their NAS usage (http, ftp, nfs, cifs) the dedup processes causes a tremendous impact on performances! In my experience we've tested and sold both the worst Quantum (formerly ADIC) dedup appliances, NetApp with A-SIS and Falconstor but the leader remains, for the moment of course, Datadomain, both in terms of long term time space saving and performances. Dadadomain borns for "backup" (VTL a/o disk staging) and a dedup appliance, in my opinion, must do only this: to store backup data and save space.
Regards,
________________________________
Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com per conto di Vaughn Stewart Inviato: mar 30/10/2007 19.26 A: Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; ggwalker@mindspring.com; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: Re: A-SIS questions
Phil,
The market offers many data deduplication technologies, most of which run at the server level, may or may not dedupe the production data set, and typically incur a performance penalty when enabled.
A-SIS runs on the array, deduplicates the prodcution data set, and incurs minimal system overhead. in addition, de-duplicated data sets can be replciated in their deduplicated state providing storage savings on the prodcution and remote data sets.
As I know you are aware that with any technology one should should follow best practices to ensure optimal results. I was about to ask you about your business challenges, but I noticed that as your are with EMC so I'd suspect that your business challenges aren't focused on reducing storage costs.
Maybe we could find a customer who would like to compare the benefits of A-SIS vs Avamar in a head to head evaluation where we could share the results on toasters! Would you be interested in working together to pull this off?
Vaughn Stewart
On 10/30/07, Fote_Philip@emc.com Fote_Philip@emc.com wrote:
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
-- Vaughn Stewart
It seems as if you've experienced the high CPU yourself, this is not just theory. Can you tell me when this was (during the de-dup scheduled runs, or during the normal writing)? We're looking to implement this pretty heavily for some of our filers, even for Tier 1 in some cases. I'd like to know what to watch out for before we step into this...
________________________________
From: Milazzo Giacomo [mailto:G.Milazzo@sinergy.it] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 7:01 AM To: Vaughn Stewart; Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; Glenn Walker; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: R: A-SIS questions
Hi All
sorry but I disagree with the cited "minimal system impact" that Vaughn cites talking about A-SIS.
When we think to dedup processes in a Nearstore VTL appliance I can also accept the high overhead on CPU that this causes because in a "backup" environment we can also accept that this process slows the general I/O values but, as long NetApp offer the choice in the FAS appliances and their NAS usage (http, ftp, nfs, cifs) the dedup processes causes a tremendous impact on performances!
In my experience we've tested and sold both the worst Quantum (formerly ADIC) dedup appliances, NetApp with A-SIS and Falconstor but the leader remains, for the moment of course, Datadomain, both in terms of long term time space saving and performances. Dadadomain borns for "backup" (VTL a/o disk staging) and a dedup appliance, in my opinion, must do only this: to store backup data and save space.
Regards,
________________________________
Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com per conto di Vaughn Stewart Inviato: mar 30/10/2007 19.26 A: Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; ggwalker@mindspring.com; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: Re: A-SIS questions
Phil,
The market offers many data deduplication technologies, most of which run at the server level, may or may not dedupe the production data set, and typically incur a performance penalty when enabled.
A-SIS runs on the array, deduplicates the prodcution data set, and incurs minimal system overhead. in addition, de-duplicated data sets can be replciated in their deduplicated state providing storage savings on the prodcution and remote data sets.
As I know you are aware that with any technology one should should follow best practices to ensure optimal results. I was about to ask you about your business challenges, but I noticed that as your are with EMC so I'd suspect that your business challenges aren't focused on reducing storage costs.
Maybe we could find a customer who would like to compare the benefits of A-SIS vs Avamar in a head to head evaluation where we could share the results on toasters! Would you be interested in working together to pull this off?
Vaughn Stewart
On 10/30/07, Fote_Philip@emc.com Fote_Philip@emc.com wrote:
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues,
but
there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can
happen
in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the
other
node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters
for
test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity
you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60
on
NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any
one
using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a
couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you
use
SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our
Oracle
and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected,
at
least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
-- Vaughn Stewart
It seems as if you've experienced the high CPU yourself, this is not just theory. Can you tell me when this was (during the de-dup scheduled runs, or during the normal writing)? We're looking to implement this pretty heavily for some of our filers, even for Tier 1 in some cases. I'd like to know what to watch out for before we step into this...
As I understand it, deduplication works like this:
1) Server receives a block of data to write to disk.
2) Server computes the MD5 digest for the data in the block, which is a 128 bit value. This calculation is CPU intensive. (SHA may be used instead of MD5)
3) Server looks up the digest in a hash table to see if there is already a block on disk with the same digest, i.e., a potential duplicate.
4) If found, server verifies that the new block and existing block are indeed identical. If so, then the server uses a reference to the existing block rather than writing the new block to disk.
5) If there is no matching block for the new block, then it is written to disk and its digest is added to the hash table.
When first setting up deduplication, the server does not have the hash table yet, so it scans each data block on disk and computes its MD5 digest and builds the hash table. During this process, duplicate blocks may be discovered, in which case each duplicate block can be freed and replaced with a reference to an identical block.
MD5 is CPU intensive, but CPUs are now so fast that this may not be an issue. And perhaps netapp has optimized its MD5 implementation or is using some other digest algorithm that uses less CPU.
Steve Losen scl@virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640
University of Virginia ITC Unix Support
That's also my understanding. Just curious as to what Giacomo's experience (or anyone else's) was in a real-world environment. IE: when it's enabled, it is always slow? Or just when first enabling it? What types of workloads, etc?
-----Original Message----- From: Stephen C. Losen [mailto:scl@sasha.acc.Virginia.EDU] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:37 AM To: Glenn Walker Cc: Milazzo Giacomo; Vaughn Stewart; Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
It seems as if you've experienced the high CPU yourself, this is not just theory. Can you tell me when this was (during the de-dup
scheduled
runs, or during the normal writing)? We're looking to implement this pretty heavily for some of our filers, even for Tier 1 in some cases. I'd like to know what to watch out for before we step into this...
As I understand it, deduplication works like this:
1) Server receives a block of data to write to disk.
2) Server computes the MD5 digest for the data in the block, which is a 128 bit value. This calculation is CPU intensive. (SHA may be used instead of MD5)
3) Server looks up the digest in a hash table to see if there is already a block on disk with the same digest, i.e., a potential duplicate.
4) If found, server verifies that the new block and existing block are indeed identical. If so, then the server uses a reference to the existing block rather than writing the new block to disk.
5) If there is no matching block for the new block, then it is written to disk and its digest is added to the hash table.
When first setting up deduplication, the server does not have the hash table yet, so it scans each data block on disk and computes its MD5 digest and builds the hash table. During this process, duplicate blocks may be discovered, in which case each duplicate block can be freed and replaced with a reference to an identical block.
MD5 is CPU intensive, but CPUs are now so fast that this may not be an issue. And perhaps netapp has optimized its MD5 implementation or is using some other digest algorithm that uses less CPU.
Steve Losen scl@virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640
University of Virginia ITC Unix Support
Let's clarify, when A-SIS runs it will consume CPU, however A-SIS is a batch process and is not running constantly. Specifically in VMware environments the most common schedule we see is either weekly or monthly and typically during times of lower utilization . Such as weekends where historically other activities are scheduled, tasks such as backup to tape. If these timeframes are acceptable for backup to tape, then they should be acceptable for A-SIS updates..
Glenn Walker wrote:
It seems as if you’ve experienced the high CPU yourself, this is not just theory. Can you tell me when this was (during the de-dup scheduled runs, or during the normal writing)? We’re looking to implement this pretty heavily for some of our filers, even for Tier 1 in some cases. I’d like to know what to watch out for before we step into this…
*From:* Milazzo Giacomo [mailto:G.Milazzo@sinergy.it] *Sent:* Thursday, November 01, 2007 7:01 AM *To:* Vaughn Stewart; Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; Glenn Walker; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com *Subject:* R: A-SIS questions
Hi All
sorry but I disagree with the cited "minimal system impact" that Vaughn cites talking about A-SIS.
When we think to dedup processes in a Nearstore VTL appliance I can also accept the high overhead on CPU that this causes because in a "backup" environment we can also accept that this process slows the general I/O values but, as long NetApp offer the choice in the FAS appliances and their NAS usage (http, ftp, nfs, cifs) the dedup processes causes a tremendous impact on performances!
In my experience we've tested and sold both the worst Quantum (formerly ADIC) dedup appliances, NetApp with A-SIS and Falconstor but the leader remains, for the moment of course, Datadomain, both in terms of long term time space saving and performances. Dadadomain borns for "backup" (VTL a/o disk staging) and a dedup appliance, in my opinion, must do only this: to store backup data and save space.
Regards,
*Da:* owner-toasters@mathworks.com per conto di Vaughn Stewart *Inviato:* mar 30/10/2007 19.26 *A:* Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; ggwalker@mindspring.com; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com *Oggetto:* Re: A-SIS questions
Phil,
The market offers many data deduplication technologies, most of which run at the server level, may or may not dedupe the production data set, and typically incur a performance penalty when enabled.
A-SIS runs on the array, deduplicates the prodcution data set, and incurs minimal system overhead. in addition, de-duplicated data sets can be replciated in their deduplicated state providing storage savings on the prodcution and remote data sets.
As I know you are aware that with any technology one should should follow best practices to ensure optimal results. I was about to ask you about your business challenges, but I noticed that as your are with EMC so I'd suspect that your business challenges aren't focused on reducing storage costs.
Maybe we could find a customer who would like to compare the benefits of A-SIS vs Avamar in a head to head evaluation where we could share the results on toasters! Would you be interested in working together to pull this off?
Vaughn Stewart
On 10/30/07, Fote_Philip@emc.com Fote_Philip@emc.com wrote:
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
-- Vaughn Stewart
I believe there's a misunderstanding of A-SIS technology and how it is implemented based be discussions around performance impacts and concerns. A-SIS was designed to NOT be a real time de-dupe specifically to not have negative performance impacts. Instead A-SIS is a scheduled process which runs in a batch - style mode, allowing customers to schedule windows of operation around the demand cycles of their data sets.
WE should really move forward here. May I suggest that if you are considering deploying VMware on NetApp and leveraging A-SIS, you should ask to speak with reference accounts who use A-SIS in their production environments. I'd suggest that you'll be quite surprised. From there, I know you'll validate the technology i your lab, and eventually roll it into production.
For NetApp A-SIS is not new technology, rather its another use of NetApp pointer based file system WAFL. For 15 years NetApp has been able to manipulate data in manners not available to other vendors. From zero performance impact Snapshots, to SnapMirror, SnapVault, FlexVols, FlexClone, etc to the latest functionality A-SIS. If you like the previous technologies, then you'll like A-SIS.
Vaughn
Milazzo Giacomo wrote:
Hi All
sorry but I disagree with the cited "minimal system impact" that Vaughn cites talking about A-SIS. When we think to dedup processes in a Nearstore VTL appliance I can also accept the high overhead on CPU that this causes because in a "backup" environment we can also accept that this process slows the general I/O values but, as long NetApp offer the choice in the FAS appliances and their NAS usage (http, ftp, nfs, cifs) the dedup processes causes a tremendous impact on performances! In my experience we've tested and sold both the worst Quantum (formerly ADIC) dedup appliances, NetApp with A-SIS and Falconstor but the leader remains, for the moment of course, Datadomain, both in terms of long term time space saving and performances. Dadadomain borns for "backup" (VTL a/o disk staging) and a dedup appliance, in my opinion, must do only this: to store backup data and save space.
Regards,
*Da:* owner-toasters@mathworks.com per conto di Vaughn Stewart *Inviato:* mar 30/10/2007 19.26 *A:* Fote_Philip@emc.com; jack1729@gmail.com; ggwalker@mindspring.com; jeremy.page@gilbarco.com; toasters@mathworks.com *Oggetto:* Re: A-SIS questions
Phil,
The market offers many data deduplication technologies, most of which run at the server level, may or may not dedupe the production data set, and typically incur a performance penalty when enabled.
A-SIS runs on the array, deduplicates the prodcution data set, and incurs minimal system overhead. in addition, de-duplicated data sets can be replciated in their deduplicated state providing storage savings on the prodcution and remote data sets.
As I know you are aware that with any technology one should should follow best practices to ensure optimal results. I was about to ask you about your business challenges, but I noticed that as your are with EMC so I'd suspect that your business challenges aren't focused on reducing storage costs.
Maybe we could find a customer who would like to compare the benefits of A-SIS vs Avamar in a head to head evaluation where we could share the results on toasters! Would you be interested in working together to pull this off?
Vaughn Stewart
On 10/30/07, Fote_Philip@emc.com Fote_Philip@emc.com wrote:
Just a general question on ASIS. How does it impact system performance? Is it enough so you need to plan around it?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:02 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: M. Vaughn Stewart; Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
I agree that Vmotion and HA / DRS can handle most hardware issues, but there is an advantage to using MSCS. An application restart can happen in seconds or minutes. I can also force applications over to the other node to apply OS patches. We have several Virtual-Virtual clusters for test environment and several physical-virtual clusters for production.
Jack
Glenn Walker wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why someone would use MSCS on ESX:
MSCS is primarily used for HARDWARE-LEVEL fault tolerance (it won't
help
if the application crashes, so much as if the hardware dies).
VMotion can be used in place of MSCS for hardware-level fault
tolerance,
IIRC, which negates the need for MSCS within a VM.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
[mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]
On Behalf Of M. Vaughn Stewart Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you
gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple
of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random
docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
-- Vaughn Stewart
Not sure what flexclone would buy you over ASIS for VMs. That's the main reason I am considering ASIS, something like 4 gig of data per VM minimum will be de-duped. We have quite a few VMs. Add to it sparse provisioning and the fact that we can use snapvault for our backups and I'm pretty excited about it.
-----Original Message----- From: M. Vaughn Stewart [mailto:mvstew@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
I think Flexclone will save a lot of time and IOPS in creating new VMs from your golden image; then you can split the clone and A-SIS after, right?
Glenn (the other one)
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Page, Jeremy Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:33 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: A-SIS questions
Not sure what flexclone would buy you over ASIS for VMs. That's the main reason I am considering ASIS, something like 4 gig of data per VM minimum will be de-duped. We have quite a few VMs. Add to it sparse provisioning and the fact that we can use snapvault for our backups and I'm pretty excited about it.
-----Original Message----- From: M. Vaughn Stewart [mailto:mvstew@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 5:08 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: Page, Jeremy; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: A-SIS questions
FlexClone will clone a datastore, for VM level cloning granularity you gonna have to wait I think something is just around the corner.
As for MSCS you need RDMs as VMDKs are not supported with MSCS
RDMs can be either FCP or iSCSI VMDKs can be on NFS or VMFS (which is over FCP or iSCSI)
We are in the process of testing ESX on NFS. We have 2 out of 60 on NFS now. I just started thinking about using flexclones, is any one using flex clones with NFS for creating clones of VM's.
Also, from what I have read, to use MSCS I need to use an RDM from iscsi or FC luns...correct?
Thanks Jack
M. Vaughn Stewart wrote:
Jeremy,
A-SIS has a slight write performance penalty (a few points) and typically also sees a slight read performance gain (of the same amount), so in short customers who are using it love it. Now you don't use it everywhere, like on DB files.
As for VMware on NFS, enjoy your solution it rocks, don't take my word for it. Google VMware on NFS and sort by date, you'll have allot of reading to do. Quotes from executives at EMC and VMware just support what you are deploying. Make sure to see NetApp's TR3428 for deployment details.
See ya Vaughn
I have read some of the info on how A-SIS works but I have a couple of questions:
- Assuming an average compression rate (say /home with random docs
in it) how much of a performance hit does it impose 2) Does it change how much data is sent over the wire when you use SnapMirror/SnapVault? I.e. if I get 30% compression on a 1 gig snapshot do I send 1 gig or 700 mb to update my target?
Oh, and for the folks who helped earlier, we are moving our Oracle and ESX systems to NetApp, the pSeries will be fibre connected, at least at first but the ESX stuff is all going on NFS.
~Jeremy *__* This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.
-
Fote_Philip＠emc.com -
Glenn Dekhayser -
Glenn Walker -
Jack Lyons -
M. Vaughn Stewart -
Matthew Zito -
Milazzo Giacomo -
Page, Jeremy -
Scott Lowe -
Stephen C. Losen -
Vaughn Stewart