improving disk latency and throughput with vmware presented by raxco software, inc. march 11, 2011
Post on 12-Jan-2016
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Improving Disk Latency and Throughput with VMware
Presented byRaxco Software, Inc.
March 11, 2011
Today’s Agenda
• Provide technical information on how NTFS impacts VMware I/O performance
• Examine ESX I/O test results • Economic impact of Windows guests• Solutions
Virtualization Benefits
• Server consolidation• Less physical space for data centers• Lower energy costs• Easier management• Eco-friendly alternative
Identifying and Correcting Problems
• Latency is your best indicator of a performance problem– Device latency is vSphere’s report of the physical storage response time
– Kernel latency is vSphere’s report of ESC’s ability to manage IO
• Experts disagree on specifics, but most agree that… Device latency in excess of 15ms is worth inspection
Device latency in excess of 30ms is likely a problem
Kernel latency in excess of 2ms means ESX queues are overflowing
• High device latency can result in ESX queuing– So, correct slow hardware first!
– Then, consider reducing VMDKs on a VMFS volume
– Only then consider changing queue depths
© Copyright 2010 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.
Storage Contention Solution: Storage IO Control
• SIOC calculates data store latency to identify storage contention– Latency is a normalized, average across
virtual machines
– IO size and IOPS included
• SIOC enforces fairness when data store latency crosses threshold– Default of 30ms
– Fairness enforced by limiting VMs access to queue slots
• Net effect: trade throughput for latency
© Copyright 2010 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.
With Storage IO ControlActual Disk Resources utilized by each VM are in
the correct ratio even across ESX Hosts
NTFS I/O Storms
NTFS Behavior
• NTFS fragments files and free space• Increases logical I/O to storage controller• More logical I/O = More physical I/O • Multiple instances of Windows on host can
lead to I/O contention
What is Fragmentation?
??
??
?
?
?
? ?
?
?
?
?
?
??
??
? ?
? ??
??
?
?
?
?
?
Logical v Physical
• Logical Level – NTFS needs disk and cluster size,
enumerates LCNs– Creates $MFT and $Bitmap
metadata– $Bitmap is how NTFS “sees”
the disk – Has no idea about physical/virtual
disk types
Anatomy of an MFT Record
(vcn, lcn, run length): (8a85, 9189a, 7)(vcn, lcn, run length): (8a85, 9189a, 7)
File Allocation
• Create $MFT record (one or more)• $Bitmap accessed to locate free space • $MFT record is updated with content
CreateBitmapAccess
MFTUpdate
File Access
• Load portion of MFT with correct record via directory
• Locate file in the MFT• Pass starting LCN’s and run lengths to disk
controller• Number of logical fragments influences
number of physical seeks
Load LocateFile
# LCN’s # PhysicalSeeks
Logical v. Physical
• Physical Level– Disk controller Maps LCNs to PCNs– Writes data to disk
Wasted Seeks
Partition State
Total Number of I/O Requests Sent to the File
System
Total Number of Resulting
Disk Accesses/Seeks
Net Wasted Seeks When
Running SYSmark
Percent Net Wasted Seeks When Running
SYSmark
Fragmented 1,320,686 2,090,649 769,963 58.30%
After PerfectDisk
1,434,454 1,616,847 182,393 12.72%
After Built-In 1,411,613 1,931,395 519,782 36.82%
How This Affects A Virtual Environment
• P2V Conversion• Extra Hypervisor Overhead• Disk Latency Degradation• Overall Performance • System Throughput• Wasted Space• Costly
P2V Conversion
Physical Drive
No Optimization Optimization
24GB 24GB 22GB 2GB Smaller
ESX Cluster Testing
• Identical disks - 40% free space• Optimized one set, the other “as is”• Installed MS Office and MS SQL• Captured metrics with VMware’s vscsiStats
utility
Fragmented PerfectDisk % Improvement
Total IO Count 37191 29238 21.3
Read IO Count 3066 2799 8.7
Write IO Count 34125 26439 22.5
Total I/O Count
30ms 50ms 100ms >100ms Total
Fragmented
I/O 12749 9877 8700 9116 40,442
PerfectDisk I/O
6707 4923 4081 5053 20,764
49% Reduction in Latency!
Disk Latency
Fragmented Disk PerfectDisk Disk
Total IO Equal to 524K 2512 848
Total IO > 524K 247 2959Read IO Equal to 524K 33 7
Read IO >524K 125 65
Write IO Equal to 524K 2480 841
Write IO >524K 122 2894
12X More Large I/O
12 times more of the largest IO
Large I/O
Improved Sequential I/O
Fragmented PerfectDisk Improvement
Percent Sequential 17% 27% 58%
Total IO 127703 90526 25%
Sequential IO 22126 24340 33%
Improved Sequential I/O
Installation Time Comparison
Fragmented PerfectDisk % Improvement
MS Office Install 20 min 15 min 25
MS SQL Install 76 min 51 min 33
The Cost of Fragmentation
EXAMPLE:
• 20 files x 6 seconds = 2 minutes• 300 users x 2 min = 10 hours/day• 10 hrs x $25/hr = $250/day• Annual cost = $62,500
Virtual Guest Fragmentation
• Windows guests have all the same NTFS behavior
• Fragmentation produces more IOPS• Fragmentation reduces ESX throughput• Fragmentation increases ESX disk latency• Fragmentation creates resource contention between
host & guests
Solutions
• Expensive– More disks and faster disks– Upgrade Fibre Channel– Troubleshooting
• Inexpensive– Optimize the Windows guest systems
PerfectDisk 12 vSphere
• Virtualization Awareness/host & client• OptiWrite Fragmentation Avoidance• “Zero-fill” free space
NEWNEW
NEWNEW
NEWNEW
PerfectDisk 12 vSphere
• “Short stroking” for thin provisioned disks• Schedule guest compaction• Snapshot & Linked Clone recognition
NEWNEW
NEWNEW
NEWNEW
PerfectDisk Benefits on ESX
• Saves $$$ in productivity and admin• Reduces resource contention for VM’s• Reduces total IO workload• Improves throughput• Reduces disk latency• Delivers optimal performance
Contact Raxco
• Free Evaluation Software• Excellent Support to Get You Started• White Papers • Great ROI• www.raxco.com • Toll Free: 1.800.546.9728
top related