HighDots.NET Computer Hardware Forums  

SAS and multipath/load balancing on Windows

Storage systems Storage system issues, both hardware and software (comp.arch.storage)


Discuss SAS and multipath/load balancing on Windows in the Storage systems forum.



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old   
Ben
 
Posts: n/a

Default SAS and multipath/load balancing on Windows - 05-02-2007 , 05:28 PM






Hello,

I am looking at setting up a system to support analysis of large
datasets. The application normally reads through the source data,
writes out a working temporary, and then continues to make read passes
through the work file. Occasionally it will read from the work files
and write out a new work file. The files will be >100GB. The I/O
should mainly be sequential with read passes being far more common.

The hardware we have to work with is a Dell 6850 server with a SAS 5/E
adapter (4x3.0 Gbps port) and a MD3000 RAID w dual 4x3.0 Gbps port
(the dual allows redundancy but we don't need that now). The MD3000
is loaded with 15x300GB 15K drives. The MD3000 is rated "up-to"
1400MB/sec. The Dell is loaded with two 7140M quad-core processors w/
16MB of cache each and 64GB of RAM. The system will be running
Windows 2003 x64. For better or for worse, this is fixed in the short-
term. We can buy different controller cards or minor software (<
$2000) if we could expect marked advantages.

My first question is about multipath/load balancing -- will I need a
multipath/load balancing solution (e.g. Dell/EMC PowerPath) in order
to get maximum I/O performance with this configuration? I am not
familiar with these multilane SAS cards -- will each path appear as a
separate HBA to the host or will the SAS 5/E effectively trunk the
four lanes into one 12Gbps channel? When I worked with multiport FC
cards in the past, each FC port operated as a separate controller and
the OS/drivers had do load balancing across the ports in order to
achieve the highest performance.

As for data layout, I am considering breaking the RAID in to three
LUNs: 5xdisks in RAID5 for primary data, 5xdisks in RAID5 for working
datasets, 4xdisks in RAID0 for sort scratch, and 1 for hot-spare
(which isn't strictly necessary since this will not be a 24x7
system). However, that layout will limit me to 400MB/sec reading.

Alternatively, I wonder if I wouldn't be better off with all 15 disks
in a single RAID5 LUN. Could I hit 1000MB/sec sequential read in this
configuration? Should I worry about spindle contention during
simultaneous sequential read/write or can the RAID controller cover
that up? I am more familiar with UNIX systems connected to dumber
hardware. What is the current performance envelope of NTFS on W2K3
with modern hardware?

Any thoughts or suggestions appreciated

P.S.The e-mail address in the From: address is not active. Please
reply to the newsgroup.


Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.