1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Hur löser vi lagringsutmaningen på...

1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.

Hur löser vi lagringsutmaningen på effektivast möjliga vis?

Markus EskolaAdvisory Systems [email protected]@wimpyfudge wimpyfudge.se

mailto:[email protected]


Recent IDC Digital Universe FindingsBy the end of this decade …


The EMC Exabyte Journey

First ExabyteQuarter

First Exabyte

Year

Q3 Q2

First Exabyte Month

2009 2010 2011 2012 20132007 20082005 2006

First Exabyte Shipped

© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.


20,772 HARD DRIVES

300 PALLETS

8 TRUCKS

85 PETABYTESSOLD INTO ONE WEB SCALE PROVIDER


INTEL MULTICOREDISRUPTIVE DATA CENTER TRENDS


Dramatic Performance Growth For x86500% Increase In Database Performance Since 2007

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

Xeon7350

4 Cores

XeonX74606 Cores

Xeon E7-887010 Cores

Xeon E7-880010 CoresXeon

X7650 8 Cores

Source: TPC-C Results compiled by EMC with public data. Any difference in System hardware or configuration may affect actual performance.

DATA

BA

SE T

RA

NS

AC

TIO

NS

PER

MIN

UTE


VIRTUALIZATIONDISRUPTIVE DATA CENTER TRENDS

Source: IDC Server Virtualization MCS, February 2013

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

2,500,000

5,000,000

7,500,000

10,000,000

12,500,000

15,000,000

17,500,000

Physical Hosts

Virtual Machines


The CPU to HDD Performance GapCPU Improves 100 times Every Decade – Disk Speed Hasn’t

100 times improved

10,000 times improved

2000 2010 2020

MOORE’S LAWCPU continue to improve while disk drive performance remains flat.

As a result, applications will increasingly be IO-bound unless we rapidly move to FLASH.

100XPER DECADE


Why Disk Aggregation is Losing SteamMoore’s Law drives the escalating need for IO transactions

0tan

19a5

6651

9

0tan

20a5

6652

0

0tan

21a5

6652

1

0tan

22a5

6652

2

0tan

23a5

6652

3

0tan

24a5

6652

4

0tan

25a5

6652

5

0tan

26a5

6652

6

0tan

27a5

6652

7

0tan

28a5

6652

8

0tan

29a5

6652

9

0tan

30a5

6653

0

0tan

1a56

651

0tan

2a56

652

0tan

3a56

653

0tan

4a56

654

0tan

5a56

655

0tan

6a56

656

0tan

7a56

657

0tan

8a56

658

0tan

9a56

659

23 36 58 93 148 237 378 603 962 1,536 2,451 3,912 6,243 9,964 15,903 25,381 40,509

64,652

103,184

164,682

262,833

The Number of Drives Needed per Host over Time

?

Weare

Here

Host

Drives



100 times improved

10,000 times improvedFLASH

2000 2010 2020



100XPER DECADE


Anatomy of an Enterprise FLASH DriveDesigned for Reliability, Data Integrity and Performance

SLC NANDFLASH

DRAM

End to End CRC

Controller

SAS or SATA ports


Storage System Design is Book-ended by Opposite TechnologiesFLASH Transformed Storage

GB IOPS

NL-HDD 0tan15a566815 0tan29a566029

15K HDD 0tan7a56617 0tan1a56601

SSD 200 5,000

3,000

0tan29a566029 600 0tan1a56601 200

5,000

Drive Capacity & IOPS

SSD

15K HDD

NL HDD

LOWEST

$/IOSSD

$.99/IO

LOWEST

$/GBNL-HDD$.43/GB


Comparing Associated CostsWhich Technology is The Most Efficient?

15K HDD

7200 HDD

FLASH

$3 $8 $13 $18 $23 $28

15K HDD 7200 HDD FLASH

$/GB 1.8 0.458333333333333

24.75

Capacity Acquisition Cost

15K HDD

7200 HDD

FLASH

$1 $3 $5 $7 $9 $11 $13 $15 $17


$/IOPS 6 15.2777777777778

0.99

Transaction Acquisition Cost

15K HDD

7200 HDD

FLASH

3 8 13 18 23 28


mWatt/GB 28.3333333333333

4 25

Capacity Power Cost

15K HDD

7200 HDD

FLASH

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0


mWatt/IOPS 94.4444444444445

133.333333333333

1

Transaction Power Cost

Lowest Transaction Cost

Lowest Capacity Cost


Hot or lazy?80/20


2,500TB

Data grows, majority will be coldWe can’t delete information but we can store it better…

2012

2022

50TB

Hot Warm Cold

What has your 50 TB become in 10 years?

50 X


Logical Units

Basics of autotiering…Addresses

Physical Disks

We see COLD spots, too…We See HOT Spots . . .


Examples of IO SkewDriven by Data Growth and Business Models

VeryHigh Skew

Growth: 60%Days Hot: 101% of data = 80% of IO

High Skew

Growth: 100%Days Hot: 30 4.2% of data = 80% of IO

LowSkew

Growth: 50%Days Hot: 908.2% of data = 80% of IO

Std.Skew

Growth: 50%Days Hot: 605.5% of data = 80% of IO


• 30% More Performance• 80% Less Footprint• 20% Lower Costs

• 40% More Performance• 60% Less Footprint• 15% Lower Costs

• 20% More Performance• 50% Less Footprint• Same Costs

Autotiering effectsHeavy Skew

95% of IO on 5% of data

~12% of workloads EFD

3%

FC

0

SATA

97%FAST Policy 1

Moderate Skew90% of IO on 10% of data


3%

FC

25%

SATA

72%FAST Policy 2

Low Skew80% of I/O on20 % of data


3%

FC

43%

SATA

53FAST Policy 3


64K64K

64K

FAST Virtual Pool

FASTCache

NL-HDDHDDSSD1G

FAST Cache, FAST VP + File & Block

Autotiering implementation

16,384 times more granular

SAS LUNs

LUNs

NFS/CIFS NAS Volumes


VNX5500

210 15K DRIVES

32 TB Usable. 50% Y/Y Growth. 60 Days Data Shelf-life.FLASH Usage Example


VNX5300

30200GB SSDs

16600GB 15K

SAS

243TB

NL-SASVNX5500

210 15K DRIVES


70 DRIVES

FAST Cache & FAST VP



Footprint Power IOPS

33K

3,938W45RUVNX5300

30200GB SSDs

16600GB 15K

SAS

243TB

NL-SAS

70 DRIVES

FAST Cache & FAST VP18RU

990W

74K

5%FLASH


Autotiering effects in numbers…


Using storage related metricsExample

500 TB usable capacity

220 000 IOPS performance requirement

“Default” IO skew


Monotype diskarray

6 Engine VMAX 40K w/ 1480 x 600 GB drives


PhysicalsMonotype diskarray (cont)

Power consumption: 39 kVA

Heat dissipation: 123 800 BTU/h

Weight: 8 175kg

Area:6,5 m2


Autotiered diskarray

“Default” data skew:– 2% flash– 18% FC– 80% SATA

4 Engine VMAX 40K– w/ 934 drives total


Autotiered diskarray (cont)

Power consumption: 22,12 kVA

Heat dissipation: 69 400 BTU/h

Weight: 4 883 kg

Area:4 m2


Result comparissonMonotype vs autotiered

Metric Monotype Autotiered Difference

Power consumption

39,6 kVA 23,2 kVA 17,48 kVA

Heat 126 400 BTU/h 73 800 BTU/h 57 000 BTU/h

Area 6,5 m2 4 m2 2,5 m2

Weight 8 156 kg 4 979 kg 3 273 kg

Performance 222 000 IOPS 214 530 IOPS -17 260 IOPS

Spindles 1481 934 636


2,500TB

Data grows, majority will be coldWe can’t delete information but we can store it better…

2012

2022

50TB

Hot Warm Cold

50 X


Upgrades over timeMonotype vs autotiered

Upgrade example: 200 TB usable

Fastest growing category is cold– Monotype requires 444 drives– Autotiered requires 133 capacity drives


Monotype vs Autotiered Upgraded

Metric Monotype Autotiered Difference

Power consumption

49,7 kVA 26,8 kVA 22,9 kVA

Heat 158 300BTU/h 84 100 BTU/h 74 200 BTU/h

Weight 10 290 kg 6 108kg 4 182 kg

Spindles 1925 1 067 858

Area 8,1 m2 5,8 m2 2,3 m2


Or…


Trends…


Two major long term trends appearing… Web-scale• Scale-out storage

• File• Object • Block

Flash everywhere• Flash in:

• Servers• AFA• Arrays


Copies are the new RAID (Scale-out)

Scale-Out storage – Requires multiple copies of

data for availability– Geographic dispersion

requires even more


VNX-F

Up to 600TB FLASH

A L L F L A S HVNX8000-F

VNX7600-F

1MIOPS

500KIOPS


Summary



100 times improved

10,000 times improved

2000 2010 2020



100XPER DECADE


Why Disk Aggregation is Losing SteamMoore’s Law drives the escalating need for IO transactions

0tan

19a5

6651

9

0tan

20a5

6652

0

0tan

21a5

6652

1

0tan

22a5

6652

2

0tan

23a5

6652

3

0tan

24a5

6652

4

0tan

25a5

6652

5

0tan

26a5

6652

6

0tan

27a5

6652

7

0tan

28a5

6652

8

0tan

29a5

6652

9

0tan

30a5

6653

0

0tan

1a56

651

0tan

2a56

652

0tan

3a56

653

0tan

4a56

654

0tan

5a56

655

0tan

6a56

656

0tan

7a56

657

0tan

8a56

658

0tan

9a56

659

23 36 58 93 148 237 378 603 962 1,536 2,451 3,912 6,243 9,964 15,903 25,381 40,509

64,652

103,184

164,682

262,833

The Number of Drives Needed per Host over Time

?

Weare

Here

Host

Drives



100 times improved

10,000 times improvedFLASH

2000 2010 2020



100XPER DECADE


Today’s Compute HierarchyRight data. Right Place. Right Cost.

Multi-Core/Socket CPUs− pS latency

DDR4 - 4.266GHz RAM− 7 to 200nS latency

200GB FLASH SSDs− 20 to 320 uS latency

3TB HDDs− 7 to 34 mS latency

pS

nS

uS

mS

FAST Cache

FAST Virtual Pools


FAST + Deduplication = Lowest $/GBCompounded Efficiencies

86% lower cost

83% smallerfootprint

50% lower cost

Monolithic FAST 5:10:85 FAST 5:10:85 + De-Dupe0tan28a566028

0tan19a566019

0tan10a566010

0tan1a56601

0tan21a566021

0tan2a56602

0tan15a566015 0tan7a566070tan23a566023

0tan11a566011

0tan29a566029

0tan14a566014

Compounded Efficiency Example

3TB 15K SSD

Dri

ve S

lots

Consu

med

1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Hur löser vi lagringsutmaningen på...

Documents

Transcript of 1© Copyright 2013 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. Hur löser vi lagringsutmaningen på...