No journaling involved.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Berendt
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 7:55 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Improve R&D LPAR poor disk performance (10K spiiny) by using virtualized SSD from Production LPAR
Just making sure that you are doing a true apples to apples comparison here. If the production copy is journalled then the test copy is also journalled, right? At one time we did some testing in the IBM lab with what we thought were identical setups with the machine we had back in the office. Only the IBM set up was using an iASP of SSD's. They were so much faster that we ordered SSD's but upon installation we were less than impressed. Turns out that, due to some technical difficulty with restoring into the iASP at IBM, the files were no longer journalled. I knew this and do not blame IBM. We ordered the HA Journal Performance option and that cured all of our ills.
But thanks for sharing.
Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com
From: "Steinmetz, Paul" <PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'"
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 06/27/2016 10:59 PM
Subject: RE: Improve R&D LPAR poor disk performance (10K spiiny) by
using virtualized SSD from Production LPAR
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Preliminary performance numbers.
A complicated batch process taking 2 hours on 10k spinny took 53 minutes
on R&D with virtual SSD, equaling or exceeding Production LPAR times.
5 NWSD with 6 100gb NWSSTG each, 30 NWSTG total.
My manager asked if I could somehow improve our R&D test runs to be closer
to Production run times.
I knew the 10k spinny were the issue.
I had extra SSD on Production LPAR which was purchased for a project that
was later cancelled.
I virtualized 3tb of SSD from Production LPAR to R&D LPAR.
The R&D LPAR has a large amount of cold data, 8TB, which would be hard to
cost justify 100% SSD.
On the R&D LPAR, using RSTLIBBRM, restoring to ASP2 , (5 NWSD with 6 100gb
NWSSTG each, 30 NWSTG total). which is the virtual SSD on the client R&D
LPAR, I can control by library which R&D environment needs performance.
I had some other posts about trying to virtualize the 10k load source, but
at this time I do not think this will be necessary.
I've seen this many times over the years with improvements to the DASD
subsystem.
Majority of the time, DASD improvements will result in the largest savings
when it comes to large batch processing.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Holger Scherer
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Improve R&D LPAR poor disk performance (10K spiiny) by using
virtualized SSD from Production LPAR
For performance - at least 6 NWSSTG per system, max 16 (32?) NWSSTG per
NWSD.
for performance comparison HDD/SDD - absolutely same config (# NWSSTG /
NWSD / Disk size)
If performance is not *that* issue -> one big NWSSTG is ok ;-)
-h
Am 27.06.2016 um 19:41 schrieb Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx>:
I just remember something about 6 or more storage spaces per nwsd.
And if you have a few storage spaces it's better to also have more
nwsd's.
Like, instead of maxing out the storage spaces per nwsd, create more
nwsd's.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.
midrange.com
