Search Results

Search found 29 results on 2 pages for '10gbe'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • Xsigo and Oracle's Storage

    - by Philippe Deverchère
    Xsigo, a virtual network infrastructure provider, has recently been acquired by Oracle. Following this acquisition, one might ask ourselves why it is important to Oracle and how Oracle's storage is going to benefit on the long term from this virtualized infrastructure layer. Well, the first thing to understand is that Virtual Networking addresses both network and storage connectivity. Oracle Virtual Networking, as the Xsigo technology is now called, connects any server to any network and storage, so this is not just about connecting servers to the Internet or Intranet. It is also for a large part connecting servers to NAS and SAN storage. Connecting servers to storage has become increasingly complex in the past few years because of the strong emergence of virtualization at the Operating System level. 50% of enterprise workloads are now virtualized, up from 18% in 2009, resulting in a strong consolidation of various applications in a high density server footprint. At the same time, server I/O capability increased 8x in the last 8 years. All this has pushed IT administrators to multiply the number of I/O connections in the back-end of their physical servers, resulting in a messy and very hard to manage networking infrastructure. Here is a typical view of a rack back-end when no virtual networking is used. We consider that today: - 75% of users have ten or more Ethernet ports per server - 85% of users have two or more SAN ports per server - 58% have had to add connectivity to a server specifically for VMs - 65% consider cable reduction a priority The average is 12 or more ports per server, resulting in an extremely complex infrastructure to manage. What Oracle wants to achieve with its Oracle Virtual Networking offering is pretty simple. The objective is to eliminate the complexity through a dramatic reduction of cabling between servers and storage/networks. It is also to provide a software based management system so that any server can be connected to any network or any storage, on demand, and without physical intervention on the infrastructure. At the end of the day, the picture on the left shows what one wants to get for the back-end of customer's racks: just a couple of connections on each physical server to provide a simple, agile and fast network infrastructure for both storage and networking access. This is exactly what the Oracle Virtual Networking solution does. It transforms a complex, error-prone, difficult to manage and expensive networking infrastructure into a simple, high performance and agile solution for the data center. Practically speaking, and for the sake of simplicity, imagine that each server just hosts a minimal number of physical InfiniBand HCAs (Host Channel Adapter) with two links (for redundancy) onto the Oracle Fabric Interconnect director. Using the Oracle Fabric Manager software, you'll then be able to create virtual NICs and HBAs (called vNIC and vHBA) that will be seen by the servers as standard NICs and HBAs and associate them to networks and storage systems which are physically connected to the back-end of the director through standard Fibre Channel and Ethernet GbE/10GbE ports. In addition to this incredibly simple "at-a-click" connectivity capability, the Oracle Virtual Networking solution offers powerful features such as network isolation, Quality of Service, advanced performance monitoring and non-disruptive reconfiguration, migration and scalability of networking infrastructure. So let's go back now to our initial question: why is Oracle Virtual Networking especially important to Oracle's storage solutions? After all, one could connect any storage in the back-end of the Oracle Fabric Interconnect directors, right? The answer is pretty simple: since Oracle owns both the virtualized networking infrastructure and the storage (ZFS-SA, Pillar Axiom and tape), it is possible to imagine several ways in the future to add value when it comes to connect storage to a virtualized storage network: enhanced storage capabilities, converged management between storage and network, improved diagnostic capabilities and optimized integration resulting in higher performance and unique features/functions. Of course, all this is not going to be done overnight, and future will tell us is which evolutions come first. But there is little doubt that the integration of Xsigo within Oracle is going to create opportunities for Oracle's storage!

    Read the article

  • Are FC and SAS DAS devices standard enough?

    - by user222182
    Before I ask my questions, here is some background info that may or may not be useful: For the first time I find myself needing a DAS solution. My priority is data through-put in a single direction. I can write large blocks, and I don't need to read at the same time. The server (the data producing device) is not really a typical server, its a very powerful single board computer. As such I have limited options when it comes to the add-in cards I can install since it must use the fairly uncommon interface, XMC. Currently I believe I am limited PCIex8 gen 1 which means that the likely bottle neck for me will be this 16gbps connection. XMC Boards I have found so far offer the following connections: a) Dual 10GBE ethernet controller, total throughput 20gbps b) Dual Quad SAS 2.0 Connectors (SFF-8XXX) HBA (no raid), total throughput 48 gbps c) Dual FC 8gb HBA (no raid), total throughput 16gbps My questions for you guys are: 1) Are SAS and/or FC, and by extension their HBAs, standard enough that I could purchase a Dell or Aberdeen storage server with a raid controller that has external SAS or FC ports and expect that I can connect it to my SAS or FC HBA, be presented with a single volume (if I so configured the storage server), all without having to check for HBA compatibility? 2) On a device like a Dell PowerVault (either DAS or NAS) is there an OS on it to concern myself with, or is it meant to be remotely managed? Is there a local interface in case I cant remotely manage it (i.e. if my single board computer uses an OS not supported by Dell OpenManage). Would this be true of nearly any device which calls itself a DAS? 3) If I purchase some sort of Supermicro storage chassis, installed a raid controller with external connections, is there a nice lightweight OS I can run just for management of the controller? Would I even need an OS since the raid card would be configured pre-boot anyway? 4) It is much easier to buy XMC based 10gigabit ethernet cards (generally dual port). In what ways would I be getting into trouble by using iSCSI as a DAS are direct cabling with SFP+ cables? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Oracle Expands Sun Blade Portfolio for Cloud and Highly Virtualized Environments

    - by Ferhat Hatay
    Oracle announced the expansion of Sun Blade Portfolio for cloud and highly virtualized environments that deliver powerful performance and simplified management as tightly integrated systems.  Along with the SPARC T3-1B blade server, Oracle VM blade cluster reference configuration and Oracle's optimized solution for Oracle WebLogic Suite, Oracle introduced the dual-node Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module with some impressive benchmark results.   Benchmarks on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrate the outstanding performance characteristics critical for running varied commercial applications used in cloud and highly virtualized environments.  These include best-in-class SPEC CPU2006 results with the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, six Fluent world records and 1.8 times the price-performance of the IBM Power 755 running NAMD, a prominent bio-informatics workload.   Benchmarks for Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module  SPEC CPU2006  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrated best in class SPECint_rate2006 results for all published results using the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, with a result of 679.  This result is 97% better than the HP BL460c G7 blade, 80% better than the IBM HS22V blade, and 79% better than the Dell M710 blade.  This result demonstrates the density advantage of the new Oracle's server module for space-constrained data centers.     Sun Blade X6275M2 (2 Nodes, Intel Xeon X5670 2.93GHz) - 679 SPECint_rate2006; HP ProLiant BL460c G7 (2.93 GHz, Intel Xeon X5670) - 347 SPECint_rate2006; IBM BladeCenter HS22V (Intel Xeon X5680)  - 377 SPECint_rate2006; Dell PowerEdge M710 (Intel Xeon X5680, 3.33 GHz) - 380 SPECint_rate2006.  SPEC, SPECint, SPECfp reg tm of Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 11/24/2010 and this report.    For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Fluent The Sun Fire X6275 M2 server module produced world-record results on each of the six standard cases in the current "FLUENT 12" benchmark test suite at 8-, 12-, 24-, 32-, 64- and 96-core configurations. These results beat the most recent QLogic score with IBM DX 360 M series platforms and QLogic "Truescale" interconnects.  Results on sedan_4m test case on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module are 23% better than the HP C7000 system, and 20% better than the IBM DX 360 M2; Dell has not posted a result for this test case.  Results can be found at the FLUENT website.   ANSYS's FLUENT software solves fluid flow problems, and is based on a numerical technique called computational fluid dynamics (CFD), which is used in the automotive, aerospace, and consumer products industries. The FLUENT 12 benchmark test suite consists of seven models that are well suited for multi-node clustered environments and representative of modern engineering CFD clusters. Vendors benchmark their systems with the principal objective of providing comparative performance information for FLUENT software that, among other things, depends on compilers, optimization, interconnect, and the performance characteristics of the hardware.   FLUENT application performance is representative of other commercial applications that require memory and CPU resources to be available in a scalable cluster-ready format.  FLUENT benchmark has six conventional test cases (eddy_417k, turbo_500k, aircraft_2m, sedan_4m, truck_14m, truck_poly_14m) at various core counts.   All information on the FLUENT website (http://www.fluent.com) is Copyrighted1995-2010 by ANSYS Inc. Results as of November 24, 2010. For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   NAMD Results on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module running NAMD (a parallel molecular dynamics code designed for high-performance simulation of large biomolecular systems) show up to a 1.8X better price/performance than IBM's Power 7-based system.  For space-constrained environments, the ultra-dense Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module provides a 1.7X better price/performance per rack unit than IBM's system.     IBM Power 755 4-way Cluster (16U). Total price for cluster: $324,212. See IBM United States Hardware Announcement 110-008, dated February 9, 2010, pp. 4, 21 and 39-46.  Sun Blade X6275 M2 8-Blade Cluster (10U). Total price for cluster:  $193,939. Price/performance and performance/RU comparisons based on f1ATPase molecule test results. Sun Blade X6275 M2 cluster: $3,568/step/sec, 5.435 step/sec/RU. IBM Power 755 cluster: $6,355/step/sec, 3.189 step/sec/U. See http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/hardware/reports/system_perf.html. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/performance.html for more information, results as of 11/24/10.   For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Reverse Time Migration The Reverse Time Migration is heavily used in geophysical imaging and modeling for Oil & Gas Exploration.  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module showed up to a 40% performance improvement over the previous generation server module with super-linear scalability to 16 nodes for the 9-Point Stencil used in this Reverse Time Migration computational kernel.  The balanced combination of Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system with the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module cluster showed linear scalability for the total application throughput, including the I/O and MPI communication, to produce a final 3-D seismic depth imaged cube for interpretation. The final image write time from the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes to Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system achieved 10GbE line speed of 1.25 GBytes/second or better performance. Between subsequent runs, the effects of I/O buffer caching on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes and write optimized caching on the Sun Storage 7410 system gave up to 1.8 GBytes/second effective write performance. The performance results and characterization of this Reverse Time Migration benchmark could serve as a useful measure for many other I/O intensive commercial applications. 3D VTI Reverse Time Migration Seismic Depth Imaging, see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/3d_vti_reverse_time_migration for more information, results as of 11/14/2010.                            

    Read the article

  • Best Practices - updated: which domain types should be used to run applications

    - by jsavit
    This post is one of a series of "best practices" notes for Oracle VM Server for SPARC (formerly named Logical Domains). This is an updated and enlarged version of the post on this topic originally posted October 2012. One frequent question "what type of domain should I use to run applications?" There used to be a simple answer: "run applications in guest domains in almost all cases", but now there are more things to consider. Enhancements to Oracle VM Server for SPARC and introduction of systems like the current SPARC servers including the T4 and T5 systems, the Oracle SuperCluster T5-8 and Oracle SuperCluster M6-32 provide scale and performance much higher than the original servers that ran domains. Single-CPU performance, I/O capacity, memory sizes, are much larger now, and far more demanding applications are now being hosted in logical domains. The general advice continues to be "use guest domains in almost all cases", meaning, "use virtual I/O rather than physical I/O", unless there is a specific reason to use the other domain types. The sections below will discuss the criteria for choosing between domain types. Review: division of labor and types of domain Oracle VM Server for SPARC offloads management and I/O functionality from the hypervisor to domains (also called virtual machines), providing a modern alternative to older VM architectures that use a "thick", monolithic hypervisor. This permits a simpler hypervisor design, which enhances reliability, and security. It also reduces single points of failure by assigning responsibilities to multiple system components, further improving reliability and security. Oracle VM Server for SPARC defines the following types of domain, each with their own roles: Control domain - management control point for the server, runs the logical domain daemon and constraints engine, and is used to configure domains and manage resources. The control domain is the first domain to boot on a power-up, is always an I/O domain, and is usually a service domain as well. It doesn't have to be, but there's no reason to not leverage it for virtual I/O services. There is one control domain per T-series system, and one per Physical Domain (PDom) on an M5-32 or M6-32 system. M5 and M6 systems can be physically domained, with logical domains within the physical ones. I/O domain - a domain that has been assigned physical I/O devices. The devices may be one more more PCIe root complexes (in which case the domain is also called a root complex domain). The domain has native access to all the devices on the assigned PCIe buses. The devices can be any device type supported by Solaris on the hardware platform. a SR-IOV (Single-Root I/O Virtualization) function. SR-IOV lets a physical device (also called a physical function) or PF) be subdivided into multiple virtual functions (VFs) which can be individually assigned directly to domains. SR-IOV devices currently can be Ethernet or InfiniBand devices. direct I/O ownership of one or more PCI devices residing in a PCIe bus slot. The domain has direct access to the individual devices An I/O domain has native performance and functionality for the devices it owns, unmediated by any virtualization layer. It may also have virtual devices. Service domain - a domain that provides virtual network and disk devices to guest domains. The services are defined by commands that are run in the control domain. It usually is an I/O domain as well, in order for it to have devices to virtualize and serve out. Guest domain - a domain whose devices are all virtual rather than physical: virtual network and disk devices provided by one or more service domains. In common practice, this is where applications are run. Device considerations Consider the following when choosing between virtual devices and physical devices: Virtual devices provide the best flexibility - they can be dynamically added to and removed from a running domain, and you can have a large number of them up to a per-domain device limit. Virtual devices are compatible with live migration - domains that exclusively have virtual devices can be live migrated between servers supporting domains. On the other hand: Physical devices provide the best performance - in fact, native "bare metal" performance. Virtual devices approach physical device throughput and latency, especially with virtual network devices that can now saturate 10GbE links, but physical devices are still faster. Physical I/O devices do not add load to service domains - all the I/O goes directly from the I/O domain to the device, while virtual I/O goes through service domains, which must be provided sufficient CPU and memory capacity. Physical I/O devices can be other than network and disk - we virtualize network, disk, and serial console, but physical devices can be the wide range of attachable certified devices, including things like tape and CDROM/DVD devices. In some cases the lines are now blurred: virtual devices have better performance than previously: starting with Oracle VM Server for SPARC 3.1 there is near-native virtual network performance. There is more flexibility with physical devices than before: SR-IOV devices can now be dynamically reconfigured on domains. Tradeoffs one used to have to make are now relaxed: you can often have the flexibility of virtual I/O with performance that previously required physical I/O. You can have the performance and isolation of SR-IOV with the ability to dynamically reconfigure it, just like with virtual devices. Typical deployment A service domain is generally also an I/O domain: otherwise it wouldn't have access to physical device "backends" to offer to its clients. Similarly, an I/O domain is also typically a service domain in order to leverage the available PCI buses. Control domains must be I/O domains, because they boot up first on the server and require physical I/O. It's typical for the control domain to also be a service domain too so it doesn't "waste" the I/O resources it uses. A simple configuration consists of a control domain that is also the one I/O and service domain, and some number of guest domains using virtual I/O. In production, customers typically use multiple domains with I/O and service roles to eliminate single points of failure, as described in Availability Best Practices - Avoiding Single Points of Failure . Guest domains have virtual disk and virtual devices provisioned from more than one service domain, so failure of a service domain or I/O path or device does not result in an application outage. This also permits "rolling upgrades" in which service domains are upgraded one at a time while their guests continue to operate without disruption. (It should be noted that resiliency to I/O device failures can also be provided by the single control domain, using multi-path I/O) In this type of deployment, control, I/O, and service domains are used for virtualization infrastructure, while applications run in guest domains. Changing application deployment patterns The above model has been widely and successfully used, but more configuration options are available now. Servers got bigger than the original T2000 class machines with 2 I/O buses, so there is more I/O capacity that can be used for applications. Increased server capacity made it attractive to run more vertically-scaled applications, such as databases, with higher resource requirements than the "light" applications originally seen. This made it attractive to run applications in I/O domains so they could get bare-metal native I/O performance. This is leveraged by the Oracle SuperCluster engineered systems mentioned previously. In those engineered systems, I/O domains are used for high performance applications with native I/O performance for disk and network and optimized access to the Infiniband fabric. Another technical enhancement is Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV), which make it possible to give domains direct connections and native I/O performance for selected I/O devices. Not all I/O domains own PCI complexes, and there are increasingly more I/O domains that are not service domains. They use their I/O connectivity for performance for their own applications. However, there are some limitations and considerations: at this time, a domain using physical I/O cannot be live-migrated to another server. There is also a need to plan for security and introducing unneeded dependencies: if an I/O domain is also a service domain providing virtual I/O to guests, it has the ability to affect the correct operation of its client guest domains. This is even more relevant for the control domain. where the ldm command must be protected from unauthorized (or even mistaken) use that would affect other domains. As a general rule, running applications in the service domain or the control domain should be avoided. For reference, an excellent guide to secure deployment of domains by Stefan Hinker is at Secure Deployment of Oracle VM Server for SPARC. To recap: Guest domains with virtual I/O still provide the greatest operational flexibility, including features like live migration. They should be considered the default domain type to use unless there is a specific requirement that mandates an I/O domain. I/O domains can be used for applications with the highest performance requirements. Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV) makes this more attractive by giving direct I/O access to more domains, and by permitting dynamic reconfiguration of SR-IOV devices. Today's larger systems provide multiple PCIe buses - for example, 16 buses on the T5-8 - making it possible to configure multiple I/O domains each owning their own bus. Service domains should in general not be used for applications, because compromised security in the domain, or an outage, can affect domains that depend on it. This concern can be mitigated by providing guests' their virtual I/O from more than one service domain, so interruption of service in one service domain does not cause an application outage. The control domain should in general not be used to run applications, for the same reason. Oracle SuperCluster uses the control domain for applications, but it is an exception. It's not a general purpose environment; it's an engineered system with specifically configured applications and optimization for optimal performance. These are recommended "best practices" based on conversations with a number of Oracle architects. Keep in mind that "one size does not fit all", so you should evaluate these practices in the context of your own requirements. Summary Higher capacity servers that run Oracle VM Server for SPARC are attractive for applications with the most demanding resource requirements. New deployment models permit native I/O performance for demanding applications by running them in I/O domains with direct access to their devices. This is leveraged in SPARC SuperCluster, and can be leveraged in T-series servers to provision high-performance applications running in domains. Carefully planned, this can be used to provide peak performance for critical applications. That said, the improved virtual device performance in Oracle VM Server means that the default choice should still be guest domains with virtual I/O.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2