Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
11 Posts
0
578
January 19th, 2015 14:00
VNX 5400, all-flash. RGs or Pools?
I purchased a VNX 5400, all flash disks. Since everything will be on Flash, should I just put them all into 1 flash storage pool for the best performance? Would there be any benefit to creating a second all flash pool, performance wise? Not planning on using any different features between pools. Maybe separating all my reads and writes into separate pools could possibly help? SQL is one item that I have connecting to this, was thinking I could separate the 2 pools if that would help. Or should they just all be in one pool? With all the drives being flash, it seems like I should just go with pools instead of RGs for ease of management and expandability. I don't see the need for multiple pools but wanted to make sure that I wasn't missing something.
Thanks
dynamox
11 Legend
•
20.4K Posts
•
87.4K Points
1
January 19th, 2015 16:00
unless you have specific requirements to isolate certain workloads, i like to pool all resources together.
Roger_Wu
6 Operator
•
4K Posts
1
January 19th, 2015 17:00
I agree with dynamox. Since it's an all-flash array, one storage pool is Ok.
brettesinclair
2 Intern
•
715 Posts
1
January 19th, 2015 19:00
Out of curiosity;
How many and size of drives ?
Did you compare to VNX-F ?
(and yes, I'd probably go with one pool too)
kelleg
6 Operator
•
4.5K Posts
1
January 20th, 2015 08:00
You should probably review the best practices for setting up SQL - the requirements for database files is different for the Logs/Temp and you should separate the DB files from the Logs/Temp in separate Raid Groups or Pools.
If you plan on using Snapview Snaps which require Reserve LUNs, you should also put the Reserve LUNs in a separate Raid Group.
Consider if you plan on using things like Compression or Deduplication - plan now before implementing.
Look at your IO requirements - large block vs small block, Reads vs Writes.
Putting everything into one Pool may not be the best solution.
glen
dtd6461
11 Posts
0
January 20th, 2015 09:00
I know the best practices for SQL with regards to traditional spinning disk SANs BUT I didn't think they really applied in this situation. Seems unnecessary to put the logs on RAID 10 and the databases on RAID 5 in an all flash system. Or even setting up separate pools for each. I think setting up one pool to harness all of the power of all the drives and balance the load would make the most sense, as dynamox suggested. I'm not compressing or deduplicating this particular pool, as I am more concerned with performance than I am with capacity.
It is about 10 TBs of all flash. We went 5400 because we may want to add spinning disk later for other purposes.
Thanks for everyone for your thoughts, super helpful.