On 13-Nov-2013, at 6:23 pm, Conrad Geiger wrote:
> Are you really saturating you GigE link with only 5-10 users.
>
> It sounds like you may be running out of IOs, SQL is usually a very write
> intensive workload.
Only one way to find out - deploy monitoring tools to graph metrics. I
personally
Yep, so we have specified a limit of 200Mbps in our service offering..
But again, I think windows workloads would work fine if the infrastructure
is designed from the get go for such a use case.
Thanks everybody for your feedback, I think I have got my answers.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:15 PM, C
The additional 5-10 users shouldn't be such an extreme load.
How many Mbps were you using with the 5-10 users?
I am trying to clarify if the SAN or the storage network is the bottleneck.
In either case,as previous stated it does all go back to capacity/workload
planning.
I know this is getting
Yeah with 5-10 users only :)
Also I think we don't have any write-cache (called ZILs in the ZFS lingo, I
think) on the storage server too, so SQL would be even more problematic
there..
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Conrad Geiger wrote:
> Are you really saturating you GigE link with only 5-10
Are you really saturating you GigE link with only 5-10 users.
It sounds like you may be running out of IOs, SQL is usually a very write
intensive workload.
Junaid Shahid wrote:
Thanks Todd!
Well I think the service offering is at 200Mbps.. Also I we are not using
any link aggregation at all.
Though I totally agree to your idea of going back to the drawing board and
doing capacity planning for our target workload. Thanks!
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Junaid Shahid wrote:
> Thanks Shankar!
>
> But please enlighten me as to whether you have seen or heard of people
> using "Shared"
Thanks Todd!
Well I think the service offering is at 200Mbps.. Also I we are not using
any link aggregation at all. Let me float these ideas to my team. Thanks
for your feedback!
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Todd Pigram wrote:
> Junaid,
>
> what did you set the the network rate to in the e
Thanks Shankar!
But please enlighten me as to whether you have seen or heard of people
using "Shared" primary storage for traditional Windows workloads? Or people
prefer to use Local Disk for such use cases? I mean when we use these
windows applications our cloud cannot even sustain 5 to 10 users
Junaid,
what did you set the the network rate to in the exchange service offering?
Depending on your backend network setup for that offering you may get
better results with setting it to a '0' for unlimited. On my internal CCP,
our SQL servers service offering has network rate to '0' as I am using
Hi Junaid,
On 13-Nov-2013, at 5:07 pm, Junaid Shahid wrote:
> Hi all,
> We are running a mixture of Windows and Linux VMs under different accounts
> on our cloud, that is based on CloudPlatform 3 (I know that it's a mailing
> list for ACS, but I still need your feedback so read on please :)).
>
Hi all,
We are running a mixture of Windows and Linux VMs under different accounts
on our cloud, that is based on CloudPlatform 3 (I know that it's a mailing
list for ACS, but I still need your feedback so read on please :)).
The Primary storage is based on iSCSI with GigE link, and Xen hyperviser
11 matches
Mail list logo
