| Blogs | Classifieds | Downloads | FlashChat | Gallery | Googlemap | Invite Friends | Links | Projects | Reviews | Wiki |
| |||||||||
Welcome to the pSeries Tech Forums,
our free peer-based support site for administrators, engineers and architects working with IBM pSeries servers and software. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles, tutorials and access our other free features. By joining our community you will be able to collaborate with administrators, engineers and architects charged with designing, delivering or maintaining IBM pSeries server environments. Founded by a recognized IBM pSeries consultant and IBM Redbook author, pSeries Tech Forums was developed with the single mission of bringing IBM pSeries professionals together into a single self-help community. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free to all IT professionals with responsibility for or interest in IBM pSeries servers. We invite you to join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
| Our Sponsors | |
| | |
| Want to advertise? | |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
#1
| ||||
| ||||
We have been doing some VIO disk I/O performance testing recently (disk is LUN from SAN) and getting the follwoing results The VIO server partiton gets 350MBPS through put. The AIX client partiton gets 220MBPS through put. therefore access to the same LUN gets a 37% performance reduction from the AIX client. I assume there would be some overhead, but nothing on this scale. Has anyone seen this before ? Thanks. |
|
#2
| ||||
| ||||
Hi Interesting, I will run the same test What method are you using to write data ? What is your SAN, what RAID configuration do you have ? Regards Steve
__________________ Take your time and think things through !! To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
#4
| ||||
| ||||
I have also run some quick tests with SAN Disks (DS4200) under VIO and under LPAR. VIO writes 512MB in 7sec. (dd if=/dev/zero) and LPAR needs for the same tests 10sec. So I also have around 30% degradation! This p570 is not doing anything else, it still smells like a new car ;-)
__________________ ----------------------------------------- Goalies speak softly, but carry a big stick ----------------------------------------- |
|
#6
| ||||
| ||||
@Dave What do you mean with CPU Priority? Where can I check/change it? Both Systems are "default" Installation with no parameters changed. The VIO has an uncapped CPU, with max weight and there is nothing else running on that system. So either an LPAR with direct attached FC Adapter or a VIO with FC Adapter and an LPAR that uses VIO Resources was running. I also get faster troughoutput with an old H50. Cheers Mike
__________________ ----------------------------------------- Goalies speak softly, but carry a big stick ----------------------------------------- |
|
#7
| ||||
| ||||
A few other things you wanna make sure of are... 1. that you have a min and max CPU for your VIO that are reasonable values (say 0.2 and 2 with an uncap weight of say 240... actually anything that's at least 30-50% higher than your other partitions so that if they are competing for processing resources, the VIO gets it. The rational behind this is if your VIO doesn't have any resources, none of your partitions can do anything). 2. that you have a number of virtual processor at least equal to your max cpu entitlement (if you have 1 vp and a max cpu of 2, you'll never be able to use more than 1 proc with your VIO). 3. try doing the test by sharing the lun directly to the partition (mkvdev -vdev hdiskX -vadapter vhostX -dev yadiyadiya) AND by sharing a LV to your partition (mkvdev -vdev SomeLV -vadapter vhostX -dev yadiyadiyaLV). If you are currently configured to share a drive that's under a VG and an LV in the VIO, your adding a bit of overhead you don't really need/want in this type of configuration. Hopefully this can help! Cheers. |
|
#8
| ||||
| ||||
A couple of thing sthat may help: 1. As per above from sberube, are there Logical volumes defined on the LUN at VIOS level or is the LUN directly connected through? 2. Are you using MPIO or SDD? 3. In the VIO Setup are you using multiple Fiber Channel Cards? cheers Ross
__________________ Ross Mather, IBM AIX IT Specialist. That said anything I say here is my own opinion and not anything that you can ever hold against IBM. Ohhh and don't forget that I make mistakes too.... |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 32Bit-Kernel VIO installation fails for large disk array | xcreepx | IBM PowerVM Editions | 2 | April 9th, 2007 08:45 |
| Boot for two VIO servers impossible with only one SCSI Controller | alecks84 | IBM PowerVM Editions | 7 | March 31st, 2007 09:48 |
| Vio Client san disk allocation | datamax | IBM PowerVM Editions | 2 | February 21st, 2007 03:43 |
| vio server: san (2 mirror disk) some questions? | Melih | IBM PowerVM Editions | 2 | February 15th, 2007 13:01 |
| VIO Backup Strategy | steevojb | AIX for POWER Systems | 1 | August 30th, 2006 10:38 |