Still celebrating National IT Professionals Day with 3 months of free Premium Membership. Use Code ITDAY17

x
?
Solved

SAN or DAS Hyper V Performance

Posted on 2015-01-28
5
Medium Priority
?
410 Views
Last Modified: 2015-02-02
Hello,

We currently have 2 Hyper-v hosts (IBM X series) with local attached storage. In total we have 14 VM's.
Each VM acts as a RDP Host and provides access to an ERP Solution based on SQL & MS Access.

We had some issues lately with local drives and we are looking into replacing our DAS with a entry level SAN cfr IBM v3700. (We like to do live migration , replication....)

The SAN should host all 14VM's . The 2 hosts don't have an SAS HBA to connect with the SAN. So the only option would be to use the 1GB iScsi port. Would this be fast enough to provide access to all of our VM's ? Or should we consider to buy an IBM 6Gb SAS HBA for each host ?

For the replication part we want to use Veeam backup & replication on a 3rd host seperate host. The backup repository should also be on the SAN if possible.

Can you provide use some advice what would be the best scenario ?
0
Comment
Question by:computercenterbel
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 2
  • 2
5 Comments
 
LVL 39

Accepted Solution

by:
Philip Elder earned 1000 total points
ID: 40575265
DAS is better in my experience. Why?

Dual 6Gb SAS HBAs in each node yields an aggregate 96Gb of virtually zero latency bandwidth.

Plus, it is very simple to set up using Microsoft's MPIO. No iSCSI bandwidth restrictions, latency, and complexity.

We've been building DAS based clusters since about 2008. First with Hyper-V and now with Hyper-V with a Scale-Out File Server cluster backend (VHDX over SMBv3). In our testing a pair of SAS cables from one node gets maxed out at about 377K IOPS (4KB at various Read/Write and thread/queue depths). iSCSI can't touch that.
0
 
LVL 123
ID: 40575320
DAS, you can get a HP SAS SAN, which is dual attached (direct attached!)
0
 

Author Comment

by:computercenterbel
ID: 40575611
with das I meant local attached storage to the server like an internal sas drives on the ibm server.
would a san get better performance then local drives attached to the server?
We only have 2 physical hosts
0
 
LVL 39

Expert Comment

by:Philip Elder
ID: 40575684
Here is how we do it: 2 Node 1 JBOD Hyper-V Cluster Connectivity Guide. It includes pictures and instructions on connecting everything together. In this case we have an asymmetric cluster configuration with storage arbitration handled by Storage Spaces (JBOD = way _LESS_ dollars than shelf). Dell MD1220 is their version. We use DNS-1640 DataON JBODs.

The guide would be applicable to connecting a storage shelf (P2000MSA dual SAS, MD3220 Dual SAS). In this case storage configuration and management would be handled by the onboard software.
0
 
LVL 123

Assisted Solution

by:Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2)
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2) earned 1000 total points
ID: 40575725
Performance of DAS (or direct attached SAS MSA 2000) will be faster than an iSCSI SAN, or NAS!

If you require performance, although there are now caching functions, for Read and Write, for NAS and iSCSI SANs!

How many IOPS do you need for your VMs ?
0

Featured Post

Fill in the form and get your FREE NFR key NOW!

Veeam® is happy to provide a FREE NFR server license to certified engineers, trainers, and bloggers.  It allows for the non‑production use of Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows. This license is valid for five workstations and two servers.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

What if you have to shut down the entire Citrix infrastructure for hardware maintenance, software upgrades or "the unknown"? I developed this plan for "the unknown" and hope that it helps you as well. This article explains how to properly shut down …
Windows Server 2003 introduced persistent Volume Shadow Copies and made 2003 a must-do upgrade.  Since then, it's been a must-implement feature for all servers doing any kind of file sharing.
How to install and configure Citrix XenApp 6.5 - Part 1. In this video tutorial we have explained step by step installation of Citrix XenApp 6.5 Server on Windows Server 2008 R2 is explained in this video. We have explained the difference between…
Video by: ITPro.TV
In this episode Don builds upon the troubleshooting techniques by demonstrating how to properly monitor a vSphere deployment to detect problems before they occur. He begins the show using tools found within the vSphere suite as ends the show demonst…

721 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question