Storage Solutions SSD For Server's

aasimenator

aasimenator

MCITP 2008
Reseller
Hey,

I was recently in contact with HP Support to find out if they provide servers with SSD drive, they told me that if SSD's are used in servers their life span would not be more than 3 months :S

So I was wondering what would be the best possible solutions for Servers....

I have a Dell PowerEdge 2950 with 15K SAS Drives 300GB, Windows 2008 R2 With SQL Server 2008 R2 and a db about the size of 2GB, I had a SQL Query which takes about 5mins to complete. but on a i7 with VMware Workstation VM of 2GB RAM & 2008 R2 & SQL install on a 60GB SSD it takes only 14 secs.

I want that kind of speed on the servers as 5mins for the query is killing the software we use. :mad:

I'll show you a quick comparision of the same sql query on same DB on a windows 2008 R2 & SQL 2008 R2, The Query only uses Hard Drive Read / Write not much ram/ cpu on any of the machine.

Machine Time

UBERDC(Citrix XenServer VM) 4:34

Hosting DC(Physical Dell 2950 Windows2008R2) 7:44

Webserver(VMware EXi VM Frontend) 9:39

Vcenter (4 gig, p4) 11:00

i7 (Physical) 1:49

i7 (VM on SSD) 0:14

Quad core 9950 (Physical) 1:50

Windows 7 on Dell R610 (VMware VM) 3:47
 
Hi

An SQL string search totally depends on the Memory & Storage I/O. As i7 has a better memory architecture and SSDs have good I/O, hence you get fairly low latency for string access.

Yes, the Enterprise Environment has huge I/O, hence an SSD will not last long. Please let me know the DAS RAID configuration.
 
Have you tried SAS drives in RAID10? Having said that, I do not believe what HP support has told you. Our host uses Intel SSDs in the servers they rent out. They wouldn't be making much, if the drives were conking out every 3 months!
 
Yogesh Sarkar said:
Have you tried SAS drives in RAID10? Having said that, I do not believe what HP support has told you. Our host uses Intel SSDs in the servers they rent out. They wouldn't be making much, if the drives were conking out every 3 months!
Click to expand...

I feel the situation here is that the SQL database is on DAS As Well. In scenarios where SSD's are on Servers are the ones where the DB is either on SAN or NAS. Another thing to notice is the Page File usage on old MS OSs, as the OS constantly writes Page-file hence the life of SSD is compromised.

However it is still a clouded situation. Only when we get a fill picture, we can find out the best solution.
 
OK How do i check the Raid configuration? as I've never got Dell Open Manage to work, nor do i have iDRAC card so i can check in the bios.

Yes SQL server Db's are on the same Drive. I've checked performace Monitor for normal HDD utilization & access time was within 5ms

I'll post a HD Tune Screenshot shortly

----update----

Screenshot HD Tune on the Dell PERC 5/i

test%252520completed.jpg
 
aasimenator said:
OK How do i check the Raid configuration? as I've never got Dell Open Manage to work, nor do i have iDRAC card so i can check in the bios.

Yes SQL server Db's are on the same Drive. I've checked performace Monitor for normal HDD utilization & access time was within 5ms

I'll post a HD Tune Screenshot shortly

----update----

Screenshot HD Tune on the Dell PERC 5/i

test%252520completed.jpg
Click to expand...

For Raid configuration check BIOS. Should be one of the following.

2.5 inch SAS (10K rpm): 36GB , 73GB and 146GB

2.5 inch SAS (15K rpm): 36GB and 73GB

3.5 inch SAS (10K rpm): 146GB , 300GB and 400GB

3.5 inch SAS (15K rpm): 36GB , 73GB , 146GB and 300GB

3.5 inch SATAu (7.2K rpm): 80GB , 160GB , 250GB , 500GB and 750GB

PERC is PowerEdge RAID Controller. Looking at 600GB of storage and 15K SAS, this should be 146x4 or 300x2.
 
aasimenator said:
^ These servers are in Montreal, Canada :p

I have no way of logging in the BIOS

As far as i remember they are 300x2
Click to expand...

If its 300x2 then you ought to have a horrible I/O. Why? Cause then you are using RAID 1 which is most pathetic configuration ever. Its just there for the sake of mirroring.

I would strongly recommend you to go above, may be RAID 10 by adding in another Disk.

Have a look at this for detailed PERC 5/i configuration & benchmark.

PERC 5/i RAID Card: Tips and Benchmarks
 
vaibhav1 said:
Get 2 velocy raptor or 2 seagate cheetah and run them on RAID 0.
Click to expand...

THat would have been a solution if it was a gaming rig. But in enterprise environment, DR is up and above all performance criteria.
 
aasimenator said:
I found out that its RAID 5 3x300GB's
Click to expand...

Ok, Is it possible to put the SQL DB on SAN.

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

Besides that, i want to know the Base System configuration with CPU & Memory.
 
JayMathers said:
Ok, Is it possible to put the SQL DB on SAN.

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

Besides that, i want to know the Base System configuration with CPU & Memory.
Click to expand...

I have 1 Dell PERC 5/i SCSI Controller & I tried moving the SQL Db to another Hard drive but still no luck with speed. I don't think its possible for us to get a SAN.

The Server is a Dell PE 2590 with 2 x Intel Xeon E5310 1.60GHz (8 Cores total)

24GB RAM

Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with Hyper-v Which Hosts SQL Server.

Anything else needed?

Could you tell me a good SAN model? I'll see if i can get them to buy one.
 
aasimenator said:
I found out that its RAID 5 3x300GB's
Click to expand...

RAID 5 has a IO penalty of 4 and RAID 1+0 has an IO penalty of 2, better to switch to RAID 1+0 if IO rate is problem. number of spindles also improves the IO rate.

aasimenator said:
I have 1 Dell PERC 5/i SCSI Controller & I tried moving the SQL Db to another Hard drive but still no luck with speed. I don't think its possible for us to get a SAN.

The Server is a Dell PE 2590 with 2 x Intel Xeon E5310 1.60GHz (8 Cores total)

24GB RAM

Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with Hyper-v Which Hosts SQL Server.

Anything else needed?

Could you tell me a good SAN model? I'll see if i can get them to buy one.
Click to expand...

using a SAN volume on a iSCSI HBA is a bad choice if you want performance. but then moving on to FC SAN is way too costly.

->Here are my two cents on upgrading to SAN<-

1. SAN or storage area network means:

a. Having storage in an array. array as in Pillar Axiom array or HP 3Par or a EMC array.

b. connecting the storage with servers over high speed network like FC or 10gig ethernet using FCswitch/10gig ethernet switch

2. So, having a SAN infrastructure setup specifically for this server is costly affair, if your firm already has SAN infrastructure in place, you could ask them to provision some storage from one of those arrays.

3. Also check what is the daily throughput of the database? i.e., 10Gig data change rate per day with 4k IOs blah blah

I could help you more if you provide me with some more details. ping me if you need help.

For me, tuning the db params to improve the IO performance and removing the bottlenecks + moving to SSDs seems more logical choice.
 
I cannot believe my eyes... this test is on a server in the same network. Which i never thought would be this good.

Its a Dell PE R610 with 2.26GHz 2CPU's 8 Core & 24GB RAM.
OS is VMWARE ESXi the Main Storage is only 134GB of which i created a Windows 7 x64 Professional VM with 40GB Space, 4 cpu & 8gb ram. installed HD Tune Trial & ran the test.

Result:
Drive%252520C%252520No%252520RAID.PNG


Plus i too understand SAN would be too costly and overkill for just DB's which are hardly over 50gb's.

I'll try installing SQL server on the Win7 vm i created above which i am seeing a good potential as speed & access time seems awesome.
 
I think the solution you should be looking at is some sort of In Memory (Physical memory) cache for the db. The db server should not be accessed directly if you want fast read/writes and sustain large number of users at the same time. I am not too well acquainted with the db side of things, but In our own company they use some Terracotta products for creating huge In Memory caches for db's. Most database solution providers also offer their own In memory caching solutions. See if you have any of it installed, but unused.

If you database queries are resulting in slow Disk I/O all the time, then you should seriously reconsider and revisit your software system architecture before you think about hardware upgrades to improve performance.
 
aasimenator said:
I cannot believe my eyes... this test is on a server in the same network. Which i never thought would be this good.

Its a Dell PE R610 with 2.26GHz 2CPU's 8 Core & 24GB RAM.

OS is VMWARE ESXi the Main Storage is only 134GB of which i created a Windows 7 x64 Professional VM with 40GB Space, 4 cpu & 8gb ram. installed HD Tune Trial & ran the test.

Result:

Drive%252520C%252520No%252520RAID.PNG


Plus i too understand SAN would be too costly and overkill for just DB's which are hardly over 50gb's.

I'll try installing SQL server on the Win7 vm i created above which i am seeing a good potential as speed & access time seems awesome.
Click to expand...

that is simply unbelievable.
 
Back
Top