C
cverbiest
Guest
Last week one of my colleagues did a test with a Nimble Storage array. He tested with a database and cpu intensive process. It contains 3 steps : delete all previous results from database, calculatie new results, write resultsto database Reference : In our tests we used the same Windows Virtual machine based on Windows Server 2012 R2. This VM has 4 vCPU’s, 16GB ram and a 100 GB dynamic VHD. The physical server the VM is running on, is a HP DL380 Gen9 machine. The database is started using “proserve -S 11000 –B 150000”. The Progress version used is 11.4 32-bit. Case 1: The VHD lives on a Nimble volume. This Nimble volume is connected through Microsoft iscsi initiator using 3x1Gbit copper wires. Duration: 53’ Case 2: The VHD exists on local storage (4x600GB SAS 15K disks in RAID10 with default HP settings using a P440ar RAID controller with 2GB cache 50% read 50% write) Duration: 36’ Case 3: as case 1, on Nimble, but with 2 APW’s and 1 BIW Duration: 42’ Case 4: as case 2, on RAID 10, but with 2 APW’s and 1 BIW Duration: 19’ The local RAID 10 disks outperform the Nimble storage array. Are we overlooking some settings that should be changed for such a setup ? There was an engineer from Nimble present and he stated that this was a Progress problem because it is only single threaded. The Nimble array was, as far as their eingineer is concerned, idling most of the time. It should not be a bottleneck yet our process is noticeable slower when the system is on that array. Are we doing something wrong ?
Continue reading...
Continue reading...