We'll look into upgrading but our experiences with upgrading have been less than positive. The failover times are just too long in most cases.
We have the 4748 line cards which are non-blocking. To further minimize any chance of competing buffers we also have the connects spread out across the switch.
I reviewed the guide you linked to and we've set all the settings according to best practices.
We use 2 VMDK's and have the second using the paravirtual controller.
I've got the Read Ahead set to 16384 right now, that number seemed to work well on our test server. I'll some testing with 8192 to see if it helps.
Our plan is to upgrade the servers to 5.1U1 but we haven't had time to take a maintenance window to do it. Our 4.1 servers were recently patched.
We have SANHQ installed and monitor it often. The problem we're seeing is we don't see a lot of IOPS (~1500) or high throughput when the server is doing large reads. The SAN seems fairly quite most of the time.
ecornwell
6 Posts
0
January 3rd, 2014 10:00
Hello,
Thank you for the response.
We'll look into upgrading but our experiences with upgrading have been less than positive. The failover times are just too long in most cases.
We have the 4748 line cards which are non-blocking. To further minimize any chance of competing buffers we also have the connects spread out across the switch.
I reviewed the guide you linked to and we've set all the settings according to best practices.
We use 2 VMDK's and have the second using the paravirtual controller.
I've got the Read Ahead set to 16384 right now, that number seemed to work well on our test server. I'll some testing with 8192 to see if it helps.
Our plan is to upgrade the servers to 5.1U1 but we haven't had time to take a maintenance window to do it. Our 4.1 servers were recently patched.
We have SANHQ installed and monitor it often. The problem we're seeing is we don't see a lot of IOPS (~1500) or high throughput when the server is doing large reads. The SAN seems fairly quite most of the time.
Thank you.