Solved!
Go to SolutionI/OPS per VMAX 10K Engine
Hello all,
I have read the VMAX 10k specs guide however I haven't been able to find a clear answer.
http://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/specification-sheet/h8716-symmetrix-vmax-10k-ss.pdf
What is the max IOPS for a VMAX 10k engine with 10Gb iSCSI front end ports? When we were doing our implementation I could have swore that they stated 20K total, which meant don't run more than 10k for N+1 purposes.
However I was having a conversation with a co-worker and he stated he thought he read that each port was 5000 I/OPS which with 8 ports translates into 40,000 I/OPS per engine.
Thank you kindly,
Steven
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 06:00
Yes I'm sorry the max possible IO rate.
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 06:00
Ok, pretty useless IMHO,
But I also need to know if it is a 10K (987) or a 10K (959)
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 07:00
Ok, but the maximum IO rate with 256K IO sizes with a 50/50 read/write ratio will be very different from a 512 byte read hit rate, maybe by 10 times or more.
Also still need to know if it is the newer 10K platform or not.
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 07:00
987 or 959 should be the first 3 digits of the serial number.
The CPUs are faster on the 987.
Yes, the IOPs per second goes down with larger IOs, but the MBs/sec go up. So it depends on if you are trying to deal with small OLTP type transactions with small block sizes, or data warehouse, with large block transfers of a lot of data.
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 07:00
I'm sorry I'm not really sure how to find out what you're asking. We are slated to go to training very soon, I've been learning on the Unisphere for the time being. I've gone into the system dashboard and viewed the details but it doesn't give me a very specific model number. I can tell you it was just installed a month or so ago. (Image attached is what the "View Details" option displays)
Also I'm trying to make sense of your graph. It would seem to imply that as your read and write sizes grow your over all IO goes down? This would seem counter intuitive to me, I always thought that the larger your read and write blocks got the more efficient it was to write them to disk.
Thank you so much for all your assistance, these forums really are wonderful especially for folks like me who are just starting out.
Steven
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 07:00
An example of IO size vs. IO rate
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 07:00
So let me give you a better understanding of why I'm asking the question because yes I agree this is totally useless. We are looking at on boarding some data, about 50/50 read write ratio, and more reads and writes are about 256k in size. It's a very specific medical application with consistent data.
The potential client is saying right now they are spiking up to about 10,000 I/OPS on their current storage array. I'm trying to understand from an engine perspective what we would need. I'm just starting with raw numbers.
Thank you much,
Steven
1808
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 08:00
Thank you, we're 987. We are dealing with an OLTP situation, so that would seem that we would get more I/OPS due to the smaller transaction sizes.
Quincy thank you so much for all your knowledge!
626
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 08:00
As far as i can recollect, you mentioned in your presentation (and the rule of thumb that we follow) that anything above 256KB should be avoided ( or try to avoid ).
So my understanding is the max IO value will be a relative value depending on the workload characteristics rather than an absolute number.
Quincy561
1281 Posts
1807
0
Posted July 2nd, 2013 06:00
There are 4 different IO types the FA can perform, each has different performance characteristics.
They are read hit, read miss, overwrite data in cache, and write to new slot.
Also the IO size will make a big difference.
So there is not one answer, unless all you want to know is the maximum possible IO rate on the FA, which is with small block read hits.