HP0-J67 · Question #30
A customer has multiple eight-node SQL clusters that are currently connected to three HP EVA 8400 storage systems. The customer has I/O latency problems on the servers and sees high queue depths on…
The correct answer is A. HP 3PAR StoreServ 10000 with 32 host prots. To resolve I/O latency and high queue depths on aging HP EVA storage for demanding SQL clusters, an upgrade to an HP 3PAR StoreServ 10000 with a large number of host ports is recommended. This provides significantly higher performance, parallelism, and connectivity to handle…
Question
A customer has multiple eight-node SQL clusters that are currently connected to three HP EVA 8400 storage systems. The customer has I/O latency problems on the servers and sees high queue depths on the EVA ports. What should you recommend to solve this problem?
Options
- AHP 3PAR StoreServ 10000 with 32 host prots
- BHP StoreVirtual multi-node with FC support
- CHP StoreVirtual with iSCSI to eliminate queue depths
- DHP EVA P6000 which has higher queue depths
How the community answered
(16 responses)- A63% (10)
- B13% (2)
- C19% (3)
- D6% (1)
Why each option
To resolve I/O latency and high queue depths on aging HP EVA storage for demanding SQL clusters, an upgrade to an HP 3PAR StoreServ 10000 with a large number of host ports is recommended. This provides significantly higher performance, parallelism, and connectivity to handle the intense I/O workload.
HP 3PAR StoreServ 10000 is a high-performance, enterprise-grade SAN array with a massively parallel architecture designed to handle demanding workloads like SQL clusters with low latency. Providing 32 host ports significantly increases the front-end connectivity and distributes the I/O load, directly mitigating high queue depths and improving overall I/O throughput and latency.
HP StoreVirtual, while scalable and supporting FC, is generally a software-defined storage solution better suited for virtualized environments and may not provide the extreme low-latency performance required for multiple demanding SQL clusters compared to a dedicated 3PAR array.
Switching to iSCSI with HP StoreVirtual does not inherently eliminate queue depths or guarantee lower latency; the underlying storage architecture and its ability to process I/O are the primary factors in resolving performance bottlenecks, and FC often offers lower latency than iSCSI for demanding workloads.
An HP EVA P6000, while a newer generation, still shares architectural similarities with the EVA 8400 and might face similar controller and port bottlenecks under heavy load; simply allowing "higher queue depths" does not solve the fundamental I/O processing issue and latency.
Concept tested: HP storage solutions for high-performance SQL, I/O latency
Source: https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a00020164enw
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.