Neel_c

updated

12 years ago

N

Neel_c

32 Posts

2

4369

July 30th, 2014 04:00

Virtual Provisioning(Best Performance) in Vmax

We have a VM infrastructure where we are supposed to provide luns of large sizes ranging from 1.2TB - 2TB.

Now my question is:

  • How many hypers should i choose to form my Meta Device? Which option would provide me greater performance(eg:  30 x 69GB or 16 x 128GB or 8 x 240GB or any other option )?
  • Also i would like to understand how this configuration can be depicted, keeping performance in mind ?

I am trying to understand whenever some one asks me to provide a lun size of 1.2 TB or 1.5 TB or 2 TB, how would i select my options (since symmetrix provides me with a range of options to form meta devices) for the best performance.
Also if some one can help me out with any white papers which explains best practice for virtual provisioning.

  • Quincy561

    1281 Posts

    2266

    1

    Posted August 1st, 2014 07:00

    http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2072070

    Before adding paths or moving VMs, I would change this parameter if it is not already.

    If you still have issues, I think going to 6 or 8 paths would be a better option than splitting the servers.  To me it would be easier to manage.

  • Quincy561

    1281 Posts

    1622

    2

    Posted July 30th, 2014 08:00

    In Symmetrix, hypers or splits are terms usually used to refer to segments on a physical disk drive.  With VP, your meta members are not associated directly with the backend configuration.

    In general, you get the maximum FA performance from a given LUN with about 32 meta members.  16 in most cases is enough.

    https://support.emc.com/docu31003_FAST_VP_for_Symmetrix_VMAX_Theory_and_Best_Practices_for_Planning_and_Performance.pdf?language=en_US

    My best practices for VMAX from EMC World

    Event Launch

  • 1622

    0

    Posted July 30th, 2014 09:00

    is it better to create a stripped meta if performance is our concern ? i.e if we have no plans to expand the dev .

    if performance is not my priority , can I simply create stripped metas for everything ?

  • Quincy561

    1281 Posts

    1622

    0

    Posted July 30th, 2014 09:00

    Yes!  If there is no need for expansion, always do striped metas. 

    See my best practices presentation at about 48 minutes into it for the meta discussion.

  • Quincy561

    1281 Posts

    1623

    0

    Posted July 30th, 2014 10:00

    The link I posted should have opened the session, but in a pop-up.

    Tech sessions, sort by most popular or most liked, and it should be the first one.

  • 1622

    0

    Posted July 30th, 2014 10:00

    What tab am I looking for ?

    Tech Sessions

    Federation

    Build-A-Hybrid-Cloud

    Area 52

    Area 53

    Demos & 360

    I can get into the site but not sure what video to watch .

  • 1623

    0

    Posted July 30th, 2014 12:00

    Thanks , got it . Watching it now .

  • Zhang_Jiawen

    2 Intern

    •

    1161 Posts

    1253

    2

    Posted July 30th, 2014 18:00

  • Neel_c

    32 Posts

    1623

    0

    Posted July 31st, 2014 01:00

    Thanks a lot Quincy. That was an excellent presentation.     

    However i still need to confirm something, if you can help me out with that.

    1> How exactly are the "cache slots" booked for thin devices?
    2> How to choose how many FAs to allocate for a particular host. What are the things that we should keep in mind?

  • Zhang_Jiawen

    2 Intern

    •

    1161 Posts

    716

    1

    Posted July 31st, 2014 02:00

    The general best practice of FA configuration is "go wide before go deep". We always hope to balance FA workloads, 4 FA ports are better than 2 for sure, with better performance and better fault tolerance. For example, if you have 2 busy FA ports. it could be bottleneck, so better to configure 4 or more.

    Besides, PowerPath is designed for balance and failover.