|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
302
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 21:40:59 -
[1] - Quote
Master Degree wrote:as a IT pro, from experience i can tell that high IO SQL DB running in M$ Failover cluster @ vmware is not the best choice, rather go SQL always on, more storage needed, agree, but failovers are much easier (and much faster).. and you can replicate more times eg active, replica 1, replica 2 etc, can use one of the replica for reads and dont bother with operations on active writting db .. only thing what can be problem is switching of listener between nodes during sudden HW crash or vmotion (MAC address conflict in vmware 5.0, hope they fix it in 6.0 while running vmotion on loaded hosts)
eventually switch to hyper-v (core preferably due patches), license is cheaper as esx(i), but the downside is, that hyper-v is with features at least two releases behind vmware (if you dont pay huge money for scvmm)
just my 5 cents, i assume you made the math already :-)
PS: really nice HW, just vendor is not one of my favorites :)
thx for the comment and info MD!
I hear you on the VMWare possibly not being the best choice as there is definitely overhead invovled (both in I/O resources as well as licensing costs!). We'll do some testing and see the impact it has, and if we don't get to where we want with it, it's out! :)
In regards to AlwaysOn we'll be using this on top of whatever route we go w/ the cluster. This will be our primary replication method for keeping both our DRS in sync as well as offering live reporting services to internal users.
CCP DeNormalized
DBA
Virtual World Operations
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
302
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 21:49:41 -
[2] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:CCP Gun Show wrote:Ix Method wrote:Volcano-powered Singularity.
Yes. we are thinking about renaming Singularity to Eyjafjallaj+Škull kidding I'd just like to say: You are a large scary man
This doesn't become really really true until you spend 2 days of heavy drinking in the middle of the icelandic wilderness with the man...
"Don't wake the Balrog!" Is a slogan we force all new Operations team members to learn very early on :)
Ops Offsite best offsite!
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 09:43:49 -
[3] - Quote
Gospadin wrote:xrev wrote:Gospadin wrote:I'm shocked that a system designed to deploy in 2016 is even using rotating drives. That data must be REALLY cold. It's called auto-tiering. The hot storage blocks reside on the fast SSD's or the internal read cache. When blocks of data aren't touched, they move to slower disks that are still more cost effective if you look to volume for your buck. Compared to Ssd's, hard disks suck at random i/o but serial streams will do just fine. I know how it works. It's just interesting to me that TQ's cold data store is satisfied with about 10K IOPS across those disk arrays. (Assuming 200/disk for 10K SAS and about 50% utilization given their expected multipath setup and/or redundancy/parity overhead)
the DB averages around 2K IOPS during a regular run and while we spike upwards of 60-70K IOPS during startup, typically things are somewhat calm (2,000 batches per second @ the DB layer isn't massive by any means, but it's also far from quiet)
So in the end we have a flash tier of 5+ TB with a DB that's only 3 TB, plus we have over 700 GB of RAM for buffer pool space.
We really just don't need anything faster :)
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 10:00:05 -
[4] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:The only problem I can see is with the database...should have been Oracle RAC cluster with ASM and Dataguard Active-Active failover :D
Ed; Admittedly the Oracle licensing structure makes me think it was designed by the Mittani himself (or one of his little minions) but everything has it's drawbacks...
Oracle RAC is super sexy for sure! But as you say, the licensing is nuts and at this point we just don't see any need to switch.
Cost / benefit just isn't there, and really MS SQL is quite reliable and has great HA/DR features with AlwaysOn and Availablity Groups.
we'll be doing some fun tests where we have a 4 node cluster with multiple AlwaysOn read secondary's: 2 nodes in our primary data center with a 3rd node in our DR Site and finally a 4th Node hosted @ amazon.
This is level of DR/BC that we're happy with :)
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
306
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 15:56:25 -
[5] - Quote
CPU's are E7-8893 v3, not E5
http://ark.intel.com/products/84688/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8893-v3-45M-Cache-3_20-GHz
Launch Date Q2'15
Errr, at least the DB CPU's are :) I don't really care so much about the others :)
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
307
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 22:27:23 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Gun Show wrote:Oh yes they do ! The entire cluster matters CCP Denormalized is just lazer focused on the DB machines apparently
I suppose I care about the rest as well... If not for those others my shiny DB servers would just sit idle all day long :)
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
307
|
Posted - 2015.10.15 16:13:42 -
[7] - Quote
Disco Dancer Dancing wrote:I hear you when it comes to a rewrite on the concept when it comes to processing the DB in memory, but in this case this was not my intention, I'm mainly talking about a storage solution that for most of the part scales better without any limitation in the SAN nodes, SAN network and the like, while also giving increased performance with storage cache in the actual compute node, access to data without traversing a SAN network (Latency is latency, and no matter how high or low it adds up to every transaction).
There are several HCI solutions on the market, giving same or better performance as a high-end SAN, smaller footprint in Us, lower energy-consumption, lower cooling needs, scales linear and you scale only when you need to.
HCI ain't a one-size fits all, henche the questions.
As a DBA who's just recently started to get invovled on the SAN storage side, everything you say its well beyond me :) But it's interesting!
Can you give some real examples of what you are talking about and not just buzz words? :)
Edit: ok, so looking here: http://purestorageguy.com/2015/03/12/hyper-converged-infrastructures-are-not-storage-arrays/
This seems to be how hadoop and these other similar systems work? It's a bunch of servers with local disks that sit behind some shared filesystem to distribute the data cross all the server nodes?
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
307
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 10:07:15 -
[8] - Quote
Disco Dancer Dancing wrote:A few interesting discussions going on here, and by the looks of it we have a few people working with storage solutions.
Thanks for crazy details Dancer, I appreciate the time spent in these repliesl!
Can you throw out a ball park $$ figure for that setup?
So can you run windows servers and such on this stuff? Can I run my MS SQL Cluster on top of this? Do I just carve out luns as with a typical SAN and present them to the cluster?
In which case how would that stack look? There would be say 6U of applicances - plus now the hardware for the windows cluster/DB (or does that run on the appliances as well?)
Cheers!
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
CCP DeNormalized
C C P C C P Alliance
307
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 12:49:40 -
[9] - Quote
Disco Dancer Dancing wrote:
So to answer the question, yes your Windows Servers, SQL and the like will reside inside this 6U, 6 Node cluster, with each node having 512GB of RAM along with 28 Cores @ 2.6GHz. They would however have to be virtualized inside either VMware, Hyper-V or the like to be able to utilize the platform as virtualization is a key-factor in most HCI solutions.
Great info again DiscoD! Really gives me a good idea of what this HCI is all about, massives thanks for the time spent to share knowledge!
CCP DeNormalized - Database Administrator
|
|
|
|
|