《全面分析Netapp的测试指标》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《全面分析Netapp的测试指标（4页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、PowerlinkJanuary 2012EMC ConfidentialInternal and Partner Use Only1No-Compromise Scale-out Storage: Analysis of NetApp 8.1 C-Mode BenchmarksTable of ContentsBackgroundClaim 1: NetApp has 35% more performance than EMC IsilonClaim 2: NetApp holds the SPECsfs world record Claim 3: NetApp has linear sca
2、lability Claim 4: NetApp has excellent storage efficiency ConclusionNote: This document arms you with responses to the recent SPECsfs 2008 NFS benchmark results posted by NetApp, which at first glance appear to be a compelling world record that surpasses EMC Isilon. You will be able to clearly ident
3、ify the weaknesses, apparent upon closer inspection, in their test and articulate these to your customers. BackgroundOn November 2, NetApp posted new SPECsfs 2008 NFS benchmark results using 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 node HA-paired FAS6240 filers. And, while the numbers may look compelling, ONTAP 8.1 Cl
4、uster-Mode has the same constraints and operational inefficiencies as scale-up 7- mode, failing to address the business and operational challenges organizations seek to solve with scale-out storage.EMC Isilon no-compromise, scale-out storage continues to set the standards for operational efficiency,
5、 data protection, storage efficiency and linear scalability of performance, and capacity. There are substantial operational differences between the 24 individual discrete 20 TB file systems employed by NetApp to achieve their benchmarks and the single scalable volume and file system used by Isilon.
6、The EMC Isilon system used in this same benchmark is a no- compromise solution that includes several unique benefits: Automated balancing of performance and capacity, eliminating data migrationsSmartPools tiering to automatically align the performance requirements and value of data to the most effec
7、tive mediaFlexProtect data protection that goes beyond RAID to automatically align data protection levels to the value of the dataEnterprise infrastructure applications that benefit the entire clusters file system 200% better storage utilization (when comparing the benchmark configurations used by N
8、etApp to those used by Isilon)N-way, scalable resiliency that improves as the cluster grows Questions raised by NetApps claims based on their SPECsfs 2008 NFS benchmark results are posed below.Claim 1: NetApp has 35% more performance than EMC IsilonPowerlinkJanuary 2012EMC ConfidentialInternal and P
9、artner Use Only2Analysis: NetApp demonstrated impressive performance from 24 filers, 24 discrete 20 TB WAFL file systems, 48 aggregates (24 data, 24 ONTAP OS) and 48 volumes (24 data, 24 ONTAP OS). They claim to provide 35% more performance than Isilon. Isilon 1.1M SPECsfs NFS and 1.6M SPECsfs CIFS
10、benchmarks, on the other hand, were accomplished with the simplicity of a single file system and single volume. The manageability implications of this are significant.When looking at the NetApp configuration more closely, one question that comes to mind is how performance and capacity are balanced a
11、cross 24 volumes and aggregates located on 24 different filers. As in ONTAP 7-mode, a file can only reside within a single volume, locked within a single aggregate, locked on a single storage controller. Administrators are still required to manage file placement within the controllers aggregates, an
12、d monitor the space and performance utilization of each of these 24 discrete volumes. In a real-world environment, there will certainly be more aggregates and many more volumes, amplifying the management tasks.Managing 24 different and independent snapshot and replication policies across 24 volumes
13、on 24 different filers also poses some unique challenges, such as how to control user quotas on 24 volumes across 24 different filers. As in ONTAP 7-mode, data protection and management infrastructure apps are hard-wired to the filer/volume construct and must be managed and applied to each individua
14、l volume on each filer independently. C-mode simply clusters scale-up filers and along with them, all of their constraints and operational inefficiencies.Claim 2: NetApp holds the SPECsfs world record Analysis: NetApp claims a world record in SPECsfs performance: 1.5M Ops from 24 FAS6240 filers. Loo
15、king more closely, it can be seen that you will incur a 34% performance penalty if you choose to run FAS6240s in C-Mode. In 7-mode, a 2-node HA pair of FAS6240s provided 190,675 SPECsfs NFS Ops. In C-Mode, 24 2-node HA pairs of FAS6240s delivered an aggregate of 1.5M SPECsfs NFS Ops or 126,065 SPECs
16、fs NFS Ops per node. It is difficult to see the benefits that make this 34% performance tax worth it. The C-Mode performance penalty is evident even in an ideal benchmark lab situationa perfect environment with homogenous nodes and disks without SnapMirrors, SnapVaults, volume movement, block reclamation scanning, dedupe, compression or drive rebuilds executing, all of which would further degrade cluster performance. The practical, real-wo
