Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


RAID and Its impact on your SQL performance


RAID and Its impact on your SQL performance

Author
Message
Nadrek
Nadrek
Ten Centuries
Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1039 Visits: 2673
tony.turner (5/2/2012)


Sounds suspiciously like your hosting company has been listening to their EMC salesperson. EMC apparently is strongly in favour of RAID 5 for SSD, thus the loss of a single disk in the array. The EMC claim is that RAID 5 on SSD has a minimal write latency effect. Not convinced from measurements in practice


My own tests of locally attached 6 drive (enterprise) SATA SSD's vs. 10 drive 15k FC SAN disks shows that the 6 disk local SATA RAID 5 is always faster; even for 8KB random writes the 6 SSD RAID 5 is near triple the performance of the 10 disk RAID 10, though for 64KB random writes it's only about a third better. For most other categories the SSD RAID 5 is very much faster, though I was limited to 4Gbps throughput on the SAN in my tests, which is an artificial throughput ceiling.

SQLIO, at least, also shows average and max latencies to be much better for the local SSD's than for the SAN.
rbarbati
rbarbati
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)Forum Newbie (9 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 9 Visits: 69
This is a nice article, but possibly a bit dated and not really considering higher-end enterprise-scale subsystems that are available and more common these days, where RAID is not only obsolete, but not even a configuration option on the subsystem. Higher end arrays are now 'wide-striping' (as one term) across the entire array and are managed by the subsystem HW/FW/SW itself. Configuration is limited more to logical units and volumes. So although the discussion is valid for a more traditional physical server, I beleive more consideration needs to be placed on newer generation virtual compute modules with high-end disk subsystems. Also when reaching multi-terabyte/pedabyte scales, spindle counts are not much of a factor really either, each spindle possibly (typically) being a terabyte drive in itself. These systems are tuned and configured so differently than, say a local disk array, that I feel it warrants mention.


I'm finding many of the articles I recieve from SSCC are not considering true enterprise and large scale systems, focusing more on simpler stand-alone systems and may be misleading to newer adminstrators who might be working in enterprise level environements.

I'd love to start seeing more write-ups targeting higher profile systems, as that is where the leading edge of technology lives and where the real sticky intracacies tart getting interesting.

The RAID topics are great above, dont get me wrong, but it's just reminiscent of a era past.

But that's just one humble adminstrators opinion of course... it's always good to see folks writing and sharing knowledge of any kind, so keep up the work !
Nadrek
Nadrek
Ten Centuries
Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)Ten Centuries (1K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1039 Visits: 2673
rbarbati (5/2/2012)
This is a nice article, but possibly a bit dated and not really considering higher-end enterprise-scale subsystems that are available and more common these days, where RAID is not only obsolete, but not even a configuration option on the subsystem. Higher end arrays are now 'wide-striping' (as one term) across the entire array and are managed by the subsystem HW/FW/SW itself. Configuration is limited more to logical units and volumes. So although the discussion is valid for a more traditional physical server, I beleive more consideration needs to be placed on newer generation virtual compute modules with high-end disk subsystems. Also when reaching multi-terabyte/pedabyte scales, spindle counts are not much of a factor really either, each spindle possibly (typically) being a terabyte drive in itself. These systems are tuned and configured so differently than, say a local disk array, that I feel it warrants mention.


I suspect one of us needs to study "wide striping" in greater depth. As far as I'm aware based on a cursory inspection of the literature, "wide striping" is commonly using the very normal, standard RAID levels this article and discussion references, but with more drives. I.e. instead of a minimum 2+1 RAID 5 array, or even a normal 4+1 or 5+1 RAID 5 array, it's implementing an N+1 array, where N is "large". It's got all the normal features of a RAID 5 with many disks in the set; it averages out performance, it's got the write penalty, and it is resilient to only 1 drive failure at a time. When you put multiple workloads on the array, you get all the same features: when both Workload A and Workload B run at the same time, they compete for resources (and if everyone runs really big, long operations the first day of the quarter, perhaps they all take a lot longer), but when only one workload is active, it gets all the performance.


Reference: http://www.storagerap.com/2010/03/calculating-the-output-of-wide-striping.html

Reference: http://gestaltit.com/all/tech/storage/chris/enterprise-computing-the-wide-striping-debate/
mrpellepelle
mrpellepelle
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)Forum Newbie (7 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 7 Visits: 186
GregoryAJackson (5/2/2012)
Hi
do you think it would be a big performance loss to store tempDB data and Logs on the same Raid?

in our BI(OLAP) enviroment , we use

1. RAID 10 for Data1 and Log2
2. RAID 10 for Data2 and Log1
3. RAID 10 for TempDB Data and Logs



You will benefit from seperating TempDB and Logs.

Budget is always an issue so you gotta pick your battles. But in a perfect World, Id absolutely seperate them.

GAJ


Hi

Just to be sure you get me right:
3rd RAID ist only for TempDB Logs.

This RAID is build of 10x 15k 600GB 3,5" Hdds.

Would you go with this config, or would you recommend to build 2 Raids out of the 10 available HDDs?
jahid786
jahid786
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)Forum Newbie (5 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 5 Visits: 85
How can i check my disks RAID status? I mean , how can i become confirm that my disks are on RAID 10?
GregoryAJackson
GregoryAJackson
SSC-Enthusiastic
SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 146 Visits: 505
Typically the RAID Controller will have an administrative software application or control panel.
this is where you can see the RAID config settings and make modifications if necessary



GAJ

Gregory A Jackson MBA, CSM
Perry Whittle
Perry Whittle
SSCrazy Eights
SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)SSCrazy Eights (8.8K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 8803 Visits: 16560
GregoryAJackson (5/4/2012)
Typically the RAID Controller will have an administrative software application or control panel.

Ultimately it's the BIOS on the RAID controller that handles the array(s), for vendor specific you may have a management interface without rebooting and entering the BIOS

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" ;-)
sqlquery-101401
sqlquery-101401
Old Hand
Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 301 Visits: 354
what is the best way to get the production IOPs requirement , we have ETL that runs for an hour and trying to get new H/w , what is the best way to know the IOPs requirement with current production load, will disk transfer/s will suffice or any better way?



GregoryAJackson
GregoryAJackson
SSC-Enthusiastic
SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)SSC-Enthusiastic (146 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 146 Visits: 505
sqlquery-101401 (5/7/2012)
what is the best way to get the production IOPs requirement , we have ETL that runs for an hour and trying to get new H/w , what is the best way to know the IOPs requirement with current production load, will disk transfer/s will suffice or any better way?


that is what I used.
If your in a SAN\NAS environment there will be additional utilities that capture this info as well.



GAJ

Gregory A Jackson MBA, CSM
sqlquery-101401
sqlquery-101401
Old Hand
Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)Old Hand (301 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 301 Visits: 354
Thanks , Yes i have couple of servers on SAN , what other utilities you refer?



Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search