Open Storage helps you save time and money for Web-scale Applications.
Want Proof?
Check this excellent benchmark for Web 2.0 run on Sun Storage 7410 (aka AmberRoad) and CMT technology based Sun Fire T5120 servers.
Its also evident from the benchmark data that you don't suffer a performance penalty for using NAS. There is a fairly common impression that performance could/would be slower than DAS, this shows that it's just not true with this environment.
| System | Processors | Results | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Storage | Ch, Cr, Th | GHz Type | users | Util | RU | watts / user | users /RU | ||
| Sun Fire T5120 | Sun Storage 7410 Unified storage array (NFS) | 1, 8, 64 | 1.4 UltraSPARC T2 | 2,400 | 72% | 1 | 0.20 | 2,400 | |
| Sun Fire T5120 | LocalFS | 1, 8, 64 | 1.4 UltraSPARC T2 | 2,400 | 60% | 1 | 0.20 |
2,400 |
|
I respectfully disagree with your comment that there is no performance penalty with NFS...You show a 12% increase in Processing utilization which is an overall performance hit. You are doing approx. the same amount of work but chewing up more CPU...while your users are still the same, if scaled to 100% Util, NFS wouldn't allow as many users as LocalFS, because you are turning Blocks into packets into blocks, which is SLOW.
Posted by Tim Ebbers on November 18, 2008 at 10:59 PM PST #
Great post! Hope to be better. Better means more features.
Posted by links london on November 06, 2009 at 06:39 PM PST #