5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

50
Best practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 with HP servers and storage in mid-range environments (MSA60, MSA70, MSA1500) Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Solution conguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Conguration Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Exchange 2007 Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Windows 2003 Active Directory Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Exchange Load Generator clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 HP StorageWorks 1500cs Modular Smart Array (MSA1500) . . . . . . 5 HP StorageWorks 60 Modular Smart Array (MSA60) . . . . . . . . . 6 HP StorageWorks 70 Modular Smart Array (MSA70) . . . . . . . . . . 6 Test congurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Exchange storage group and physical disk congurations . . . . . . . . 8 Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Test procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Denitions of mathematical operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 User workload test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Processor utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Memory utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Physical disk performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Exchange performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Testing summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Best practices and results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Exchange administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Performance and recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Storage administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Server administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Appendix A. Bill of materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Appendix B. HP Storage Planning Calculator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix C. Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 New capabilities for Exchange Server 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 64-bit platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Role-based servers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Implications for the infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Reduced I/O proles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Backup, recovery, and VSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Continuous replication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Appendix D. Microsoft Exchange Load Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Appendix E. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Transcript of 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Page 1: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Best practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 with HP serversand storage in mid-range environments (MSA60, MSA70,MSA1500)

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Solution configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Configuration Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Exchange 2007 Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Windows 2003 Active Directory Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Exchange Load Generator clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 HP StorageWorks 1500cs Modular Smart Array (MSA1500) . . . . . . 5 HP StorageWorks 60 Modular Smart Array (MSA60) . . . . . . . . . 6 HP StorageWorks 70 Modular Smart Array (MSA70) . . . . . . . . . . 6

Test configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Exchange storage group and physical disk configurations . . . . . . . . 8

Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Test procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Definitions of mathematical operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 User workload test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Processor utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Memory utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Physical disk performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Exchange performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Testing summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Best practices and results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Exchange administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Performance and recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Storage administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Server administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Appendix A. Bill of materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Appendix B. HP Storage Planning Calculator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix C. Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

New capabilities for Exchange Server 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 64-bit platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Role-based servers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Implications for the infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Reduced I/O profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Backup, recovery, and VSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Continuous replication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Appendix D. Microsoft Exchange Load Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Appendix E. Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Page 2: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Software updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Appendix F. Hard drive technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 For more information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

HP solutions and whitepapers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Microsoft Exchange 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Page 3: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Overview

In November 2006 Microsoft introduced Exchange Server 2007, and since the release of Service

Pack 1 (SP1), customers have been steadily planning and performing migrations. According to a

corporate IT survey published in Messaging and Collaboration, 2007-2008, September 2007, by

The Radicati Group, Inc., e-mail system upgrades are one of the top five messaging priorities in 2008

for companies in the medium business segment (101-1,000 mailboxes).

Companies want simple, affordable, industry-leading hardware to support their new Exchange Server 2007 environments. The HP StorageWorks Modular Smart Array (MSA) family of storage arrays combined with HP ProLiant servers provides these requirements. The Customer Focused Testing (CFT) group has conducted tests in simulated environments of 1,000 users with 750-MB mailboxes on the

MSA60, MSA70, and MSA1500 solutions. The tests compared drive type options within the arrays, including performance differences, advantages, and disadvantages.

This paper provides configuration and performance data, best practices and recommendations to

help system administrators deploy Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 on several of the HP MSA family

of products. The results presented here are derived from our extensive testing. They are intended

to help you perform pre-deployment planning and ensure adequate hardware and predictable

performance for your specific business requirements.

3

Page 4: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Solution configuration

The Exchange 2007 testing environment included a single, consolidated Exchange 2007

Server with a Mailbox Server, Hub Transport, and installed Client Access Server roles. See

“Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 ” on page 39. The Exchange Server was hosted on an HP ProLiant DL 380 G5 Server and was evaluated in three different Direct Attached Storage (DAS) solutions.

Using a three-phased testing approach, we configured the Exchange Server with an HP StorageWorks MSA60, then with an MSA70, and finally with an MSA1500 storage device. We monitored the

performance of the MSA storage devices using the drive types specified in Table 1.

Table 1. HP solution products

Testing Phase Storage Device Storage Size and Speed Array Controller

Phase I MSA60—SAS/SATA 500-GB 7.2K RPM SATA

300-GB 15K RPM SAS

P800 Controller

Phase II MSA70—SAS/SATA 120-GB 5.4 RPM SATA

146-GB 10K RPM SAS

P800 Controller

Phase III MSA1500—SCSI/SATA 500-GB 7.2K RPM SATA

146.8-GB 15K RPM SCSI

HP FC2142SR HBA

(Fibre Channel Host Bus Adapter)

Configuration Tools For each solution configuration, we used the Microsoft Exchange Load Generator (LoadGen) to

monitor Exchange 2007 Server performance under a simulated workload. The LoadGen tool placed a simulated load of 1,000 users with 750-MB mailboxes using a heavy user profile. See

“Microsoft Exchange Load Generator” on page 42.

The use of HP Storage Planning Calculator (SPC) for Exchange 2007 ensured consistent analysis for storage sizing and the number of required drives for each MSA and drive type configuration. In our tests we used both RAID 10 and RAID 5 configurations on database LUNs, again based

upon the SPC output. See “HP Storage Planning Calculator” on page 33. Tests of the various MSA devices and drive types provided opportunities to validate the SPC results by evaluating and

comparing actual Exchange 2007 performance.

We used the Microsoft Exchange Jetstress performance tool to analyze the optimum disk I/O

capabilities achieved by each configuration.

Infrastructure

Each of the three independent test environments had an identical Active Directory (AD) and network

infrastructure. Each environment consisted of one Windows 2003 Server Domain Controller that established the Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (SATA), and

Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) test domains. All three domains were child domains in the

same Active Directory Forest, operating at the Windows 2003 functional level. Each storage device

was evaluated under the same workload and stress level in its respective domain for the tested drive

configuration. The major hardware components for each test environment are described in the

sections that follow. For a complete list of components, see “Bill of materials” on page 32.

4

Page 5: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Exchange 2007 Server

The Exchange 2007 Server was hosted on an HP ProLiant DL380 G5 Server equipped with two

dual-core Intel Xeon 5110 (1.60 GHz, 1066 FSB) processors, 16 GB of RAM (PC2-5300 2 X 4 GB), Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise x64 Edition operating system with all appropriate

patches and hot fixes, and Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 release to manufacturing (RTM) with

Client Access, Hub Transport, and Mailbox Server roles. For a detailed list of software updates, see “Software ” on page 46.

The Exchange 2007 Server processor and memory configurations were recommended by Microsoft for Exchange 2007 multi-role servers (4 x processor cores), 8 GB of server RAM, and an additional 2 MB to 5 MB of RAM for each mailbox.

We followed HP SPC recommendations to connect the Exchange Server to the appropriate storage

device with a directly attached P800 Smart Array Controller (MSA60/70) or HP FC2142SR HBA

(MSA1500). The Exchange Server used two HP NC373i Multifunction Gigabit Server Adapters in a

network-teaming configuration attached to an HP ProCurve 2724 10/100/1000 Ethernet switch.

Windows 2003 Active Directory Server

The Active Directory forest had three individual child domains to host each test environment. Each

domain was autonomous and fully independent. The Windows 2003 Active Directory Servers were

configured on HP ProLiant DL380 G4 Server with two dual-core 3.40-GHz Intel Xeon processors, 4

Gb of RAM, Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition OS, and two HP NC7782 Gigabit Server Adapters.

The Windows AD site was configured as the default site and contained all AD domain controllers. AD-integrated DNS was installed on the domain controller, which used two HP NC7782 Gigabit Server Adapters in a network teaming configuration and was attached to an HP ProCurve 2724

10/100/1000 Ethernet switch operating at 1-GB network speed.

Exchange Load Generator clients

The Microsoft Exchange Load Generator placed a simulated workload of 1,000 users with 750-MB

mailboxes. All users were configured with a heavy profile resulting in an estimated .33 IOPS

(Input/Output operations per second) per user. Based on the expected workload, the SPC calculated

that the Exchange 2007 Server would support 12 storage groups and 12 databases. The Exchange

Load Generator clients were hosted on HP ProLiant DL320 servers with Xeon Pentium 4 2.66-GHz

processors, 640 MB of RAM, and two HP NC7760 Gigabit Server Adapters in a network teaming

configuration.

HP StorageWorks 1500cs Modular Smart Array (MSA1500)

The MSA1500 was configured with enabled Active/Active functionality and connected to two HP

StorageWorks 30 Modular Smart Array SCSI enclosures with 14 X 146-GB 15K SCSI hard drives, one

HP StorageWorks 20 Modular Smart Array with 12 X 500-GB 7.2K SATA hard drives. The MSA1500

was directly connected to the Exchange 2007 Server via two 2-GB FC HBA interfaces.

5

Page 6: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

HP StorageWorks 60 Modular Smart Array (MSA60)

We evaluated the MSA60 with 300-GB 15K SAS 3.5-inch hard drives and 500-GB 7.2K SATA

3.5-inch hard drives. The MSA60 was directly connected to the Exchange 2007 Server’s P800 Smart Array Controller using 1-meter external SAS cables.

HP StorageWorks 70 Modular Smart Array (MSA70)

We evaluated the MSA70 with 146-GB 10K SAS 2.5-inch hard drives and 120-GB 5.4K SATA

2.5-inch hard drives. The MSA70 was directly connected to the Exchange 2007 Server’s P800 Smart Array Controller using one-meter external SAS cables.

Test configurations The three test environments had identical Active Directory and network infrastructure configurations. The storage device and drive configurations were set up as described in this section and shown in

the configuration diagrams.

Figure 1 shows the Exchange 2007 Server in the MSA70 test configuration, including one Active

Directory domain controller and two Exchange Load Generator clients. The Exchange 2007 Server was connected to the MSA70 in a DAS configuration. We evaluated the MSA70 with 146-GB 10K

2.5-inch SAS hard drives and 120-GB 5.4K 2.5-inch SATA hard drives (120-GB SATA configuration

required 2 X MSA70 arrays). All servers were connected to an HP ProCurve 2724 10/100/1000

Ethernet switch. The Exchange 2007 Server and the Exchange Load Generator clients incorporated

network teaming.

Figure 1. DL380 G5 − MSA70 test configuration

Figure 2 shows the Exchange 2007 Server in the MSA60 test configuration, including one Active

Directory domain controller and two Exchange Load Generator clients. We connected the Exchange

2007 Server to the MSA60 in a DAS configuration. The MSA60 was evaluated with 300-GB 15K

3.5-inch SAS hard drives and 500-GB 7.2K 3.5-inch SATA hard drives. All servers were connected to

6

Page 7: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

an HP ProCurve 2724 10/100/1000 Ethernet switch. The Exchange 2007 Server and the Exchange

Load Generator clients incorporated network teaming.

Figure 2. DL380 G5 - MSA60 test configuration

Figure 3 shows the Exchange 2007 Server in the MSA1500 test configuration, including one Active

Directory domain controller and two Exchange Load Generator clients. The Exchange 2007 Server was connected to the MSA1500 in a DAS configuration. The MSA1500 was connected to two

MSA30 arrays and one MSA20 expansion enclosure. We evaluated the MSA1500 with 146-GB 15K

SCSI hard drives and 500-GB 7.2K 3.5-inch SATA hard drives. All servers were connected to an HP

ProCurve 2724 10/100/1000 Ethernet switch. The Exchange 2007 Server and the Exchange Load

Generator clients incorporated network teaming.

7

Page 8: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 3. DL 380 G5 − MSA1500 test configuration

Exchange storage group and physical disk configurations

We configured the physical disks for the Exchange 2007 storage requirements using the HP Array

Configuration Utility. To optimize performance, the disks were separated into two independent arrays. One array was dedicated to the Exchange 2007 databases, and the other was dedicated to

the Exchange log files. The actual number of drives in each array was dependent on results from

the HP Storage Planning Calculator.

Figure 4 shows the physical disk layout in the Array Configuration Utility of the Exchange database

and log file arrays. Array C was configured to support the Exchange databases. The database

disk array was configured to support 12 x 112-GB logical drives, each dedicated to an Exchange

database. Array D was dedicated to the Exchange log files, and supported 12 x 39-GB logical drives, each drive supporting one Exchange storage group. The number of drives in an array varied

depending on the HP Storage Planning Calculator results. The number and size of the logical disks were constant in all test configurations.

8

Page 9: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 4. Array configurations

The Exchange storage group directory structure used volume mount points to present the logical disks

to the operating system, eliminating the need to use drive letters and simplifying administration and

scripting by providing a logical directory structure. Figure 5 shows the Exchange storage group

structure. Each storage group had a dedicated folder in the main Exchange folder on the E: drive. Each storage group folder also served as the volume mount point for the database and log file disks.

9

Page 10: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 5. Directory structure

10

Page 11: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Testing

Objectives In our performance tests we evaluated the efficiency of the MSA60, MSA70, and MSA1500

using various SAS, SATA and SCSI drive configurations. The configurations included a ProLiant DL380GB Exchange Server Solution to host a mid-range Exchange 2007 environment. In each

test we used the same Exchange 2007 user configuration and identical LoadGen workloads. See

“Microsoft Exchange Load Generator” on page 42. The tests identified and compared the impacts of implementing each drive technology and storage device exposed to the same Exchange 2007

environmental factors.

All three test environments used identical server configurations, Active Directory, and network

infrastructure. The changes made to the test environments involved the storage devices, drive type, and drive configuration.

Test procedure

To establish each test environment, we performed the following tasks:

1. Plan Exchange storage requirements and the storage group configuration. The HP Storage

Planning Calculator determined the proper Exchange 2007 storage group requirements and the

number and type of hard drives. See “HP Storage Planning Calculator” on page 33.

2. Assemble all server hardware and mount all equipment on racks.

3. Connect the appropriate storage device to the Exchange 2007 Server.

4. Install server operating systems using the HP SmartStart CD. Install all appropriate patches and

hot fixes using the Windows Update service. See “Software ” on page 46.

5. Install and configure Active Directory on the domain controller and establish the appropriate

test domain.

6. Configure and partition storage using the HP Array Configuration Utility and then use the

Diskpart.exe utility to align disks.

7. Use the Exchange Jetstress utility to analyze disk configuration performance capability (a

6-hour test run).

8. Install Microsoft Exchange 2007 RTM on the Exchange Server. The Exchange Server was configured with the HUB Transport, Client Access, and Mailbox Server roles.

9. Create and configure the Exchange 2007 storage groups (12) and databases (12) as based on

the results of the HP Storage Planning Calculator.

10. Use the Exchange Best Practice Analyzer to verify healthy Exchange installation.

Note

The following steps were necessary for the testing environment, but are not necessary for production deployments.

11. Install and configure Exchange Load Generator on the Exchange Load Generator clients.

11

Page 12: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

12. Use the Exchange Load Generator to create 1,000 test users in the test domain. Edit the Load Generator configuration XML file to achieve the appropriate Mailbox

size (750 MB) and user workload action profile to match a heavy user profile. See

“Microsoft Exchange Load Generator” on page 42.

13. Use the Exchange Load Generator to initialize each Exchange database to prepare for a

performance test run.

We ran a minimum of three performance tests and one Jetstress test for each storage device and

drive configuration. The Jetstress test validated disk I/O performance capabilities. By running

three tests, we ensured consistent performance results for comparison between configurations. We

used the following procedure:

1. Use Exchange Load Generator to initialize (reinitialize) the Exchange databases.

2. Configure Windows Performance Monitor to capture desired performance counter data for an

8-hour time period.

3. After the initialization/reinitialization process, use the Exchange Load Generator to conduct an 8-hour performance test.

4. Start Windows Performance Monitor to start the data capture.

5. After an 8-hour performance test, reinitialize if necessary, or reconfigure storage device with

the next drive configuration.

Definitions of mathematical operations The data in Tables 2 through 15 was analyzed using the following mathematical operations and

definitions:

• Mean average - An arithmetic mean (or simply the mean) of a list of numbers is the sum of the

list divided by the number of items in the list.

• Standard deviation - The most common measure of statistical dispersion, standard deviation

measures data set value variations. If many data points are close to the mean, the standard

deviation is small; if many data points are far from the mean, the standard deviation is large.

• 95th percentile - This calculation indicates that 95% of the time a performance counter object is at or below this amount. The top 5% of the performance utilization are short spikes of atypical usage, and these inflated statistics are discarded. By examining the 95th percentile, we provide a

more accurate representation of the performance counter high points. The 95th percentile is not an average, but a representation of the highest value reached.

User workload test results The workload (IOPS per user) achieved by the Exchange Load Generator clients on the Exchange

Server with each storage device and drive in a RAID 10 configuration is shown in Table 2.

These calculations are based on the Physical Disk/Transfers/Sec performance counter of the

Exchange database array divided by the number of users. The values reflect both the average and

the 95th percentiles of transfers per second and calculated user IOPS. The 95th percentile of user IOPS shows a maximum workload profile of .2878 IOPS per user by the Exchange Load Generator clients. A variation of only +/– .0094 exists between each configuration. This data indicates a

12

Page 13: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

consistent generated workload by the Exchange Load Generator clients, resulting in consistent and

accurate test performance.

Table 2. User IOPS in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and

type

8 X 500-GB

SATA

12 X 300-GB SAS

30 X 120-GB

SATA

24 X 146-GB

SAS

8 X 500-GB

SATA

24 X

146.8-GB

SCSI

Transfers/sec avg 118 124 120 129 117 120

95th percentile 277 285 281 299 282 302

User IOPS avg .118 .124 .120 .129 .117 .120

95th percentile .277 .285 .281 .299 .282 .302

—Transfers/sec mean average = 287.66 +/--- 9.40

—User IOPS mean average = .2878 = +/--- .0094

Table 3 shows the amount of user I/O achieved by the Exchange Load Generator clients on the

Exchange 2007 Mailbox Server with each storage device and drive in a RAID 5 configuration.

The values show both the average and the 95th percentiles of transfers per second and the calculated

user IOPS. The 95th percentile of user IOPS shows a user maximum workload profile of .2915 by

the Exchange Load Generator clients. A variation of only +/--- .0128 existed between each test configuration. This data shows a consistent generated workload by the Exchange Load Generator clients, resulting in consistent and accurate performance of each test configuration.

By comparing the RAID 5 with the RAID 10 results (based on the LoadGen workload), we find no

significant variations in performance data and conclude that RAID level has no impact on user I/O

workloads placed on the Exchange Server in this test environment.

Table 3. User IOPS in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and

type

11 X 500-GB

SATA

8 X 300-GB

SAS

19 X 120-GB

SATA

16 X 146-GB SAS

11 X 500-GB

SATA

16 X 146.8-GB

SCSI

Transfers/sec avg 125 119 124 134 133 117

95th percentile 311 288 284 304 290 272

User IOPS avg .125 .119 .124 .134 .133 .117

95th percentile .311 .288 .284 .304 .290 .272

—Transfers/sec mean average = 291.5 +/--- 12.82

—User IOPS mean average = .2915 +/--- .0128

Processor utilization

Table 4 shows processor utilization and workload for each storage device and drive in RAID 10

configurations. This comparison determines if a particular storage device or drive configuration has any significant impact on processor utilization. The performance data is derived by capturing data

from the middle 4 hours of an 8-hour performance test. The values show both the average and the

95th percentile of each storage device and drive configuration. The percentage of processor time

13

Page 14: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

reveals an average of 7.33% utilization, with average highs estimated at 16.33%. The standard

deviation between each test configuration was +/--- .471%.

We recommend a four-core processor configuration for a multiple-role (Hub, CAS, and Mailbox

roles) Exchange 2007 Server. To accommodate CAS and Hub utilization on a single server with the

Mailbox role, reduce the 1,000 mailbox per core calculation based on the average client profile by

20% (800 mailboxes/core).

Table 4. Processor utilization in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 8 X 500-GB 12 X 300-GB 30 X 24 X 146-GB 8 X 500-GB 24 X

SATA SAS 120-GB SAS SATA 146.8-GB SATA SCSI

% Processor time avg 7 8 7 7 7 8

95th percentile 18 18 15 15 14 18

Interrupts/sec avg 1,216 1,313 1,228 1,228 1,202 1,274

95th percentile 1,901 2,026 1,848 1,922 1,695 1,978

Processor queue

length

.055 .049 .044 .041 .057 .061

Table 5 shows the results of processor utilization based on RAID 5 storage configurations. The

percentage of processor time shows an average of 7.16% processor utilization, with the average high

estimated at 17%. The standard deviation between each test configuration was +/--- .372%.

This data shows a consistent consumption of processor utilization for all storage test configurations. The data indicates that a specific storage device and a properly sized drive configuration have no

impact on the processor utilization of the Exchange Server. The tests also confirmed that there were

no significant variations in processor utilization between RAID levels; the RAID level on a properly

sized configuration has no impact on the processor utilization of the Exchange Server.

Table 5. Processor utilization in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 500 GB­ 8 X 300-GB 19 X 16 X 146-GB 11 X 500-GB 16 X 146.8-GB

SATA SAS 120-GB SAS SATA SCSI SATA

% Processor time avg 7 8 7 7 7 7

95th percentile 18 19 15 18 15 17

Interrupts/sec avg 1,277 1,331 1,210 1,034 1,261 1,319

95th percentile 2,022 2,026 1,844 1,819 1,806 1,937

Processor queue

length

.070 .073 .063 .059 .048 .050

Memory utilization

Table 6 shows the memory utilization and workload for each test configuration in RAID 10

configurations. Microsoft recommends 8 GB of memory for a multiple-role Exchange 2007 Server, and an additional 2 MB to 5 MB per mailbox. Based on this recommendation, 13 GB (8 GB per

14

Page 15: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

server plus 5 GB per mailbox x 1,000) was planned for the test environment. To accommodate the

memory requirement, the Exchange Server required 16 GB of RAM.

Table 6 identifies any significant fluctuation in memory utilization on the Exchange Server resulting

from changes in storage devices and drive configurations. The data is derived by evaluating the

middle 4 hours of an 8-hour performance test.

The Exchange database cache indicates an average size of 4,040 MB with fluctuations as high as 5,164 MB, and a deviation of +/– 151 MB per performance test. The amount of memory committed

by the Exchange Server reflects an average of 7,005 MB with an average high of 7,927 MB and a

standard deviation of +/– 182 MB between test configurations.

The page file information shows consistent paging between all test configurations and indicates an

average of 69.07 MB (+/– 3.67) of Pool Nonpaged Bytes used by the operating system and kernel processes. The amount of Pool Paged Bytes used for applications was an average of 79.17 MB, with

a deviation of +/– 2.98. This memory utilization data indicates that selecting a properly-sized

storage device and drive configuration does not have any significant impact on memory utilization on

the Exchange 2007 Server.

Table 6. Memory utilization in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 8 X 500-GB 12 X 30 X 120-GB 24 X 146-GB 8 X 500-GB 24 X

SATA 300-GB SATA SAS SATA 146.8-GB

SAS SCSI

Database cache size avg 4,187 3,961 4,134 3,915 4,230 3,816

95th percentile 4,984 5,664 4,958 4,760 5,056 5,563

Available MB avg 10,001 9,991 10,070 10,272 9,750 9,949

95th percentile 11,000 11,136 11,092 11,348 10,731 11,110

Committed MB avg 6,969 7,101 6,942 6,690 7,295 7,031

95th percentile 7,863 8,050 7,824 7,632 8,167 8,029

Cache % hit avg 100 100 100 100 100 98

95th percentile 100 100 100 100 100 100

Page/sec avg 27 31 26 39 58 26

95th percentile 67 70 64 57 67 59

Page fault/sec avg 1,403 1,383 1,429 1,240 1,275 1,094

95th percentile 5,129 4,925 5,102 4,609 4,343 4,212

Pool paged MB avg 77.23 78.81 78.57 75.25 84.85 80.33

95th percentile 78.17 79.98 79.85 81.96 87.60 82.14

Pool nonpaged MB avg 66.95 65.99 66.16 66.83 74.56 73.91

95th percentile 66.99 66.08 66.18 66.85 74.80 73.93

Note

Pool Paged Bytes and Pool Nonpaged Byte counts were converted to megabytes for simplicity.

15

Page 16: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Table 7 shows the results of memory utilization based on RAID 5 storage configurations. The

Exchange database cache size shows an average size of 3,836 MB with fluctuations as high as 5,044 MB, and a deviation of +/– 143.14 MB per performance test. The amount of memory

committed by the Exchange Server shows an average of 6,830 MB, with an average high of 7,919

MB and a standard deviation of +/– 213 MB between test configurations.

The page file information reveals consistent paging between all test configurations, and an average

of 69.96 MB (+/– 4.19) of Pool Nonpaged Bytes used by the operating system and kernel processes. The amount of Pool Paged Bytes used for applications and non-system processes was an average of 81.94 MB with a deviation of +/– 10.45. There were no significant changes in memory utilization for any storage device and drive configuration. The evaluation and comparison of RAID types shows that RAID level has no impact on memory utilization.

Table 7. Memory utilization in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 500-GB 8 X 300-GB 19 X 120-GB 16 X 11 X 16 X SATA SAS SATA 146-GB SAS 500-GB 146.8-GB

SATA SCSI

Database cache size avg 3,677 3,795 3,913 3,896 4,073 3,662

95th percentile 4,254 5,510 4,812 5,611 4,975 5,105

Available MB avg 10,259 10,526 10,278 10,425 9,992 9,072

95th percentile 11,136 11,394 11,437 11,293 11,126 10,961

Committed MB avg 6,966 6,546 6,695 6,647 6,986 7,141

95th percentile 7,591 7,373 7,674 8,474 8,340 8,062

Cache % hit avg 100 100 100 100 100 100

95th percentile 100 100 100 100 100 100

Page/sec avg 25 52 28 46 28 39

95th percentile 62 71 74 63 73 61

Page faults/sec avg 1,263 1,633 1,409 1,646 1,257 1,138

95th percentile 4,543 5,873 5,225 5,134 5,034 4,232

Pool paged MB avg 104.9 78.28 75.93 75.67 75.70 81.21

95th percentile 105.9 81.05 76.53 79.11 78.69 84.22

Pool nonpaged MB avg 74.35 65.28 65.65 66.43 73.80 74.28

95th percentile 74.49 65.31 65.78 67.53 74.53 74.30

Note

Pool Paged Bytes and Pool Nonpaged Byte counts were converted to megabytes for simplification.

Physical disk performance

Prior to putting the Exchange Server into simulated production (LoadGen testing), we evaluated the

Exchange 2007 physical disks using the Microsoft Exchange Jetstress utility to verify the performance

and stability of the disk subsystem. Jetstress verifies if an Exchange Server disk configuration meets or exceeds a simulated user I/O load criterion in a nonproduction environment. The Jetstress utility

identifies the maximum I/O on a given storage configuration. For this test (1,000 users with an

16

Page 17: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

estimated heavy user profile of .31 IOPS per user), the Jetstress target criterion were 310 transfers per second (number of users X user profile) on the database disks:

• Required I/O capability = number of users x user profile

• Required I/O capability = 1,000 x .31

• I/O requirement per disk = 310

Jetstress physical disk results

Table 8 and Table 9 provide the Jetstress physical disk results for each storage device and disk

configuration in both RAID 10 and RAID 5 testing. This performance data is derived from the

evaluation of an 8-hour Jetstress performance test.

Table 8 shows Jetstress results of each storage device and drive configuration based on RAID 10

configurations. This test data shows the overall performance capabilities of the SAS, SATA, and SCSI technologies, and their ability to meet or exceed the target criterion of 310 IOPS for database disks.

The SATA configuration shows that the SATA drive configurations produced the least amount of IOPS

in (transfers per second) and maintain the recommended Exchange read and write latencies (Disk

Sec/Read Disk Sec/Write), which is less than 20 ms for database disk and less than 10 ms for Log

File Disks. In addition, the MSA1500 with 8 X 500 GB 7.2 K (MSA20 enclosure) configuration falls short of test criterion of 310 IOPS on the database disk. This configuration could result in a physical disk bottleneck if deployed in a 1,000-user production environment. The MSA20 is a SATA enclosure

with Ultra 320 SCSI host connectivity, ideal for low-cost, high-capacity minimum I/O requirements, and is not intended for high transactional applications such as Exchange.

Comparisons of the MSA60 and MSA70 SATA configurations show that both configurations meet the test criterion. However, the MSA70 with 30 X 120-GB 5.4 SATA drives produced a significantly

higher number of IOPS (1,414) than the MSA60 with 8 X 500-GB 7.2K SATA drives (352). This can

be attributed to the increased number of spindles in the MSA70 SATA configuration.

The SAS and SCSI drive configurations show a much higher number of I/O operations and

lower read and write latencies. This data shows clearly that SAS and SCSI drives will produce

higher I/O capabilities than SATA drives. SATA drives are more affordable in comparison to

SAS and SCSI hard drives and may be a more attractive solution to some administrators with

limited budgets common to small to mid-range business environments. Administrators with limited

budgets who are examining SATA drive solutions might consider using a larger number of smaller capacity drives, rather than fewer high capacity drives to achieve better I/O capabilities. See

“Hard drive technologies” on page 48.

17

Page 18: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Table 8. Jetstress performance in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 8 X 500-GB 12 X 300-GB 30 X 120-GB 24 X 146-GB 8 X 500-GB 24 X

SATA SAS SATA SAS SATA 146.8-GB SCSI

DB Transfers/sec avg 352 1,628 1,414 1,833 257 1,787

95th percentile 582 1,765 2,247 2,714 282 1,989

DB Disk read/sec avg 138 989 888 965 153 901

95th percentile 278 1,076 1,044 1,430 179 987

DB Disk sec/read avg .019 .018 .019 .019 .020 .019

95th percentile .021 .021 .021 .024 .023 .023

DB Disk write/sec avg 214 639 527 867 127 886

95th percentile 304 689 1,352 1,332 105 1002

DB Disk/sec write avg .013 .002 .009 .002 .010 .002

95th percentile .018 .004 .012 .010 .011 .010

Logfile Transfers/sec avg 165 364 152 536 65 414

95th percentile 257 405 204 795 79 474

Logfile Disk read/sec 0 0 0 0 0 0

Logfile Disk/sec read 0 0 0 0 0 0

Logfile Disk write/sec avg 165 364 152 536 65 414

95th percentile 257 405 204 795 79 474

Logfile Disk/sec write avg .008 .000 .009 .001 .008 .003

95th percentile .010 001 .014 .023 .015 .004

Table 9 shows the Jetstress results of each storage device and drive configuration based on Raid

5 configurations. The SAS and SCSI configurations performed well and achieved or exceeded the

Jetstress I/O test criterion of 310 IOPS.

The SATA test data shows that the SATA drive configurations produced the fewest IOPS while

maintaining the recommended Exchange read and write latencies. As in Table 8, the MSA1500

with 11 X 500-GB 7.2 K (MSA20 enclosure) hard drive configuration fell short of the test criterion

of 310 IOPS on the database disk. This configuration could result in a physical disk bottleneck ifdeployed in a production environment.

The 500-GB SATA drives in the MSA60 and MSA1500 configurations required three additional hard

drives, based on the results from the HP Storage Planning Calculator. The SATA drive performance

limitations and compensation for the RAID 5 write penalty requires additional drives. It would be

more economical (and provide higher redundancy) to use the RAID 10 SATA configurations.

Both the MSA60 and MSA70 SATA configurations meet the test criterion. The SAS and SCSI drive

configurations show a much higher number of I/O operations, and lower read and write latencies.This data shows that SAS and SCSI drives produce higher I/O capabilities than SATA drives.In addition, a comparison of both RAID 10 and RAID 5 configurations indicates no significantdeviations for performance. The P800 Smart Array Controller performs the write caching and

compensates for the RAID 5 overhead. See “Hard drive technologies” on page 48.

18

Page 19: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Table 9. Jetstress performance in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 8 X 300-GB 19 X 120-GB 16 X 146-GB 11 X 16 X 500-GB SAS SATA SAS 500-GB 146.8-GB

SATA SATA SCSI

DB Transfers/sec avg 365 1,115 423 1,434 251 1,665

95th percentile 458 1,260 475 1,598 298 1,836

DB Disk read/sec 215 683 258 849 151 859

95th percentile 283 774 282 958 214 990

DB Disk sec/read avg .018 .019 .20 .019 .020 .019

95th percentile .023 .022 .21 .022 .028 .023

DB Disk write/sec avg 149 432 165 585 100 807

95th percentile 225 505 213 661 143 988

DB Disk sec/write avg .001 .001 .001 .001 .010 .020

95th percentile .001 .002 .001 .002 .012 .022

Logfile Transfers/sec avg 108 256 115 370 62 467

95th percentile 153 296 141 446 87 533

Logfile Disk read/sec avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Logfile Disk sec read avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Logfile Disk write/sec avg 108 256 115 370 62 467

95th percentile 153 296 141 446 87 533

Logfile Disk sec/write avg .001 .000 .000 .000 .001 .003

95th percentile .001 .001 001 .001 .001 .003

Physical disk performance using Microsoft Exchange Load Generator

Table 10 and Table 11 provide the physical disk performance data from the simulated production

environment using the Microsoft Exchange Load Generator. This data shows storage device

performance under the simulated Exchange load. The data is derived from the middle 4 hours of an 8-hour performance test.

Table 10 shows the results of the Exchange database physical disk performance based on RAID 10

storage configurations. The Exchange database physical disk evaluation shows that the Exchange

Server sustained a consistent workload across all storage devices and drive configurations, averaging

122.66 transfers per second with an average high of 285.83 transfers per second, and a deviation

of +/– 4.21 transfers per second between each performances test. The Disks read and write latencies (Disk Sec/Read and Disk Sec/Write) are within Microsoft Exchange 2007 recommendations with

the exception of the MSA1500 SATA configuration. Microsoft recommends an average of less than

20 ms for read latencies, and less than 10 ms for write latencies.

The SATA performance data evaluation shows that the SATA configurations maintained the same

amount of transfers per second on the database disk and stayed within Exchange performance

guidelines. However, by comparison the read and write latencies and average disk queue length

19

Page 20: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

(number of operations pending) of the SATA configuration is higher than the SAS and SCSI configurations. If an administrator chooses to implement a properly sized and provisioned SATA

Exchange solution, the impact will be higher latencies and higher read and write queue lengths.

Table 10. Physical disk database performance in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and ype 8 X

500-GB

SATA

12 X 300-GB

SAS

30 X

120-GB SATA

24 X

146-GB SAS 8 X 500-GB

SATA

24 X

146.8-GB

SCSI

Transfers/sec avg

95th percentile

118

277

124

285

120

281

129

299

117

282

125

291

Disk reads/sec avg

95th percentile

19

35

14

28

18

25

16

27

20

38

18

30

Disk read MB/s avg

95th percentile

.28

.57

.44

.66

.30

.61

.44

.69

.34

.56

.34

.48

Ave Disk sec/read avg

95th percentile

.014

.017

.006

.007

.014

.018

.007

.008

.024

.054

.006

.007

Disk read queue avg

95th percentile

.244

.466

.121

.229

.334

.627

.156

.306

.477

1

.105

.182

Disk write/sec avg

95th percentile

99

249

102

253

99

249

105

262

97

244

107

267

Disk write MB/s avg

95th percentile

1.70

5.76

1.74

5.47

1.70

5.68

1.79

5.51

1.93

6.49

2.17

7.14

Disk sec/write avg

95th percentile

.007

.002

.001

.001

.004

.001

.001

.001

.002

.008

.003

.008

Disk write queue avg

95th percentile

1

.548

.206

.172

.571

.340

.230

.229

.463

2

.547

2

Disk queue length avg

95th percentile

1

.982

.327

.407

.904

.943

.386

.514

.940

3

.652

2

Note

Disk Bytes Read and Write performance counts were converted to megabytes for simplicity.

Table 11 shows the results of the Exchange log file physical disk performance based on RAID 10

storage configurations. The Exchange log file physical disk evaluation shows that the load on the

Exchange Server sustained a consistent workload across all storage devices and drive configurations, averaging 75.66 transfers per second with the average high of 161.83 transfers per second, and a

deviation of +/– 2.42 transfers per second between each performance test. Each storage group and

drive configuration was within Microsoft Exchange recommended performance guidelines for write

latencies (10 ms). No read operations are conducted on log file physical disks with Exchange 2007

(unless LCR/CCR is implemented).

20

Page 21: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Log file operations consist of sequential writes that commit data from cache to the logs. By separating

databases and log files and placing them on dedicated physical disks, you can improve performance

by splitting random and sequential I/O operations. Because log file generation is a write-intensive

operation, place the log files on a RAID 10 volume if possible. However, it is acceptable to place

databases on RAID 5 volumes if the storage operating budget is restricted.

Table 11. Physical disk log file performance in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 8 X 500-GB 12 X 30 X 24 X 146-GB 8 X 500-GB 24 X

SATA 300-GB 120-GB SAS SATA 146.8-GB SAS SATA SCSI

Transfers/sec avg 71 75 76 79 76 77

95th percentile 161 164 164 167 152 163

Disk reads/sec avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk read MB/s avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk sec/read avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk read queue length

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk write/sec avg 71 75 76 79 76 77

95th percentile 161 164 164 167 152 163

Disk write MB/s avg .53 .47 .53 .53 .51 .53

95th percentile 1.91 1.69 1.94 1.88 1.78 1.77

Disk sec/write avg .001 .000 .001 .000 .001 .001

95th percentile .001 .001 .003 .001 .014 .001

Disk write queue length .063 .011 .041 .018 .068 .067

95th percentile .124 .029 .066 .047 .149 .156

Disk queue length avg .063 .011 .041 .019 .068 .067

95th percentile .124 .029 .049 .149 .156

Note

Disk Bytes Read and Write performance counts was converted to megabytes for simplicity.

Exchange database physical disk performance

Table 12 and Table 13 show the Exchange database physical disk performance in the simulated

production environment.

Table 12 shows the Exchange database physical disk performance based on RAID 5 storage

configurations. The resulting evaluation shows that the load on the Exchange Server sustained a

consistent workload across all storage devices and drive configurations, averaging 125.33 transfers per second with the average high of 291.5 transfers per second, and a deviation of +/– 6.39

21

Page 22: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

transfers per second between performances test. The disks read and write latencies (Disk Sec/Read

and Disk Sec/Write) were within the Microsoft Exchange 2007 recommendations, with the exception

of the MSA1500 SATA configuration, consistent with the RAID 10 database tests results.

As in the RAID 10 database disk results, a comparison of the read and write latencies and average

disk queue length (number of operations pending) reveal that the SATA configurations are higher than the SAS and SCSI configurations. The RAID 10 and RAID 5 database physical disk performance

data reflect no significant performance impact between the storage devices and disk types. The RAID

5 write overhead was compensated by the write cache of the P800 Smart Array Controller.

Table 12. Physical disk database performance in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 8 X 19 X 16 X 146-GB -11 X 500 GB 16 X 500-GB 300-GB 120-GB SAS SATA 146.8−GB

SATA SAS SATA SCSI

Transfers/Sec avg 125 119 124 134 133 117

95th percentile 311 288 284 304 290 272

Disk reads/sec avg 27 21 23 22 23 21

95th percentile 57 54 43 45 43 38

Disk read MB/s avg .39 .33 .33 .32 .42 .37

95th percentile .88 .75 .65 .75 .82 .59

Disk sec/read avg .009 .006 .009 .006 .024 .006

95th percentile .022 .009

.021 .009 .051 .009

Disk read queue length .342 .124 .345 .122 .555 .130

95th percentile .892 .345 .718 .301 2 .268

Disk write/sec avg 98 98 101 112 110 97

95th percentile 271 259 257 259 269 247

Disk write MB/s avg 1.76 1.75 1.78 1.71 1.83 2.01

95th percentile 5.57 5.76 6.09 5.80 6.39 7.04

Disk sec/write avg .000 .000 .000 .000 .005 .003

95th percentile .001 .001

.001 .001 .009 .009

Disk write queue length .093 .074 .179 .058 .079 .929 .540

95th percentile .234 .197 .182 2 2

Disk queue length avg .436 .198 .403 .201 1 .669

95th percentile 1 .539 .885 .483 4 2

Note

Disk Bytes Read and Write performance counts were convert to megabytes for simplicity.

Table 13 shows the Exchange log file physical disk performance data based on RAID 5 storage

configurations. The evaluation shows that the Exchange Server sustained a consistent workload

across all storage devices and drive configurations, averaging 79.83 transfers per second with an

average high of 168.66 transfers per second and a deviation of +/– 4.05 transfers per second

22

Page 23: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

between each performances test. Each storage group and drive configuration was within the

Microsoft Exchange recommended performance guidelines for write latencies (10 ms). There were no

significant performance deviations between RAID 10 and RAID 5 log file physical disks.

Table 13. Physical disk log file in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 8 X 19 X 120-GB 16 X 146-GB 11 X 500-GB 16 X 500-GB 300-GB SATA SAS SATA 146.8-GB SATA SAS SCSI

Transfers/sec avg 76 82 77 83 86 75

95th percentile 180 180 156 177 158 161

Disk reads/sec avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk read MB/s avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk sec/read avg

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk read queue length

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Disk write/sec avg 76 82 77 83 86 75

95th percentile 180 180 156 177 158 161

Disk write MB/s avg .53 .58 .50 .51 .71 .51

95th percentile 2.07 2.06 1.73 1.77 2.10 1.75

Disk sec/write avg 000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001

95th percentile .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001

Disk write queue length .028 .017 .016 .18 .023 .072

95th percentile .086 .031 .041 .040 .079 .183

Disk queue length avg .028 .017 .016 .18 .023 .022

95th percentile .086 .031 .041 .040 .080 .083

Exchange performance

Table 14 and Table 15 provide the actual Exchange performance characteristics during each test configuration in both RAID 10 and RAID 5 configurations. This performance data was derived from

the middle 4 hours of an 8-hour performance test.

Table 14 shows the number of messages sent and received (delivered), and the number of messages held in queue during testing, based on RAID 10 configurations. In addition, the remote procedure

call (RPC) operations determined the end-user experience, and identified any performance latencies that could occur when accessing the Exchange Server using Microsoft Outlook.

The number of delivered messages reveals a consistent workload placed on the Exchange 2007

Server by the Exchange Load Generator clients. It shows an average of 52,329 messages received, with a deviation of +/– 2,228 messages (4%) at a rate of 3 messages per second between test

23

Page 24: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

configurations. The number of sent messages shows an average of 14,374, with a deviation of +/–

1,606 messages (11%) at a rate of .80 messages per second.

An assessment of RPC operations shows a consistent user environment across all test configurations. The average number of RPC operations from all six test configurations was 390 operations with a

standard deviation of +/– 40.51 (10.38%) between each storage device and drive configuration. The RPC averaged latency in milliseconds and is based on the average for the last 1,024 packets. Microsoft Exchange performance guidelines recommend that this value stay below 50 ms at all times.

The RAID 10 performance data evaluation shows performance well below the 50-ms threshold for all storage device configurations. However, closer evaluation of the SATA disk configurations reflects higher number of messages queued for submission and higher RPC latencies when compared to the

SAS and SCSI drive configurations. The selection of SATA drives in an Exchange 2007 configuration

led to higher latencies and increased message queue lengths compared to SAS and SCSI drive

configurations.

Table 14. Exchange performance in RAID 10 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 8 X 500-GB 12 X 300-GB 30 X 120-GB 24 X 146-GB 8 X 500-GB 24 X

SATA SAS SATA SAS SATA 146.8-GB

SCSI

Msgs delivered avg 53,741 54,579 52,831 54,274 49,125 49,425

95th percentile 74,799 74,022 73,974 74,518 69,822 71,662

Msgs del/sec avg 3 3 3 3 2 3

95th percentile 13 12 12 12 11 7

Msgs sent avg 14,542 17,546 14,377 14,210 13,186 12,385

95th percentile 20,014 23,104 19,107 19,547 18,773 13,795

Msgs sent/sec avg .826 .855 .855 .812 .835 .654

95th percentile 2 2 2 2 2 2

Msgs opened/sec 13 13 14 13 13 13

95th percentile 35 33 35 33 31 26

Receive queue size 0 0 0 0 0 0

95th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0

Msgs queued avg .637 .488 .649 .565 .627 .467

95th percentile 2 2 2 2 2 2

RPC operations/sec 388 395 443 379 421 313

95th percentile 662 690 723 661 671 619

RPC bytes sent/sec 523,355 506,393 494,493 506,645 480,870 578,769

95th percentile 1,533,024 1,385,987 1,241,699 1,338,132 1,198,445 1,312,911

RPC bytes recd/sec 99,696 102,261 96,310 100,707 94,235 155,454

95th percentile 300,168 316,603 280,657 305,738 275,942 506,232

RPC latency avg 10 3 8 3 10 4

95th percentile 30 6 17 4 30 6

24

Page 25: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Note

Pool Paged Bytes and Pool Nonpaged Bytes counts were converted to megabytes for simplicity.

Table 15 shows the number of messages sent, received, or held in queue during each test iteration, based on RAID 5 configurations. The number of messages delivered (received) reveals a consistent workload placed on the Exchange 2007 Server by the Exchange Load Generator clients. The data

shows an average of 45,937 received messages, with a deviation of +/– 2,132 messages (4.64%) at a rate of 3 messages per second between test configurations.

An average of 12,312 messages was sent, with a deviation of +/– 513 messages (4.16%) at a rate of .82 messages per second. The assessment of RPC operations shows a consistent user environment across all test configurations. The average number of RPC operations from all storage configurations was 415 operations, with a standard deviation of +/– 14.73 (3.45%) between each storage device

and drive configuration. The RPC averaged latency evaluation shows performance well below the

50-ms threshold for all storage device configurations.

As in the RAID 10 Exchange results, the SATA disk configurations indicate more messages queued

for submission and higher RPC latencies when compared to the SAS and SCSI drive configurations. This concludes that selecting SATA drives in an Exchange 2007 configuration would lead to higher latencies and increased message queue lengths compared to SAS and SCSI drive configurations. In addition, the comparisons of Exchange performance data in RAID 10 (Table 14) and RAID 5

(Table 15) reflect similar performance, and indicate no significant change in Exchange performance

based on RAID level.

25

Page 26: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Table 15. Exchange performance in RAID 5 drive configurations

Counter MSA60 MSA70 MSA1500

Drive count and type 11 X 8 X 300-GB 19 X 120-GB 16 X 146-GB 11 X 16 X 146.8-GB

500-GB SAS SATA SAS 500-GB SCSI SATA SATA

Msgs delivered avg 45,182 45,097 46,493 44,981 43,561 50,311

95th percentile 65,076 66,553 67,941 67,441 64,051 69,502

Msgs delivered/sec 3 3 3 3 3 3

95th percentile 13 13 12 13 12 12

Msgs sent avg 11,915 12,290 12,368 12,191 11,753 13,358

95th percentile 17,021 17,781 17,804 17,601 17215 18,612

Msgs sent/sec avg .80 .83 .83 .83 .836 .811

95th percentile 2 2 2 2 2 2

Msgs opened/sec 13 13 13 13 13 13

95th percentile 35 34 32 31 32 31

Receive queue size

95th percentile

0 0 0 0 0 0

Msgs queued avg .59 .629 .628 .655 .643 .605

95th percentile 2 2 2 2 2 2

RPC operations/sec 422 391 423 404 437 412

95th percentile 777 661 698 659 716 681

RPC bytes sent/sec 512,773 528,659 545,223 530,656 539,841 496,306

95th percentile 1,539,383 1,522,398 1,501,832 1,528,101 1,426,595 1,393,143

RPC bytes rec’d/sec 92,280 101,894 111,024 118,010 103,568 102,880

95th percentile 292,025 305,637 367,322 322,110 305,155 339,688

RPC avg latency 6 2 7 3 10 4

95th percentile 18 5 16 4 26 9

Testing summary

The tests provide mid-range customers (1,000 Exchange users) with insight into storage planning for Exchange 2007. They include the technical data needed to help you make informed decisions regarding drive technologies and RAID levels that suit business needs and operational budgets. Because of the lower cost associated with SATA-based storage, many administrators find SATA

technologies a more feasible alternative to the more expensive SAS and SCSI options, especially

in companies with smaller environments and operating budgets.

After exploring the impact of using SATA drive solutions in an Exchange 2007 environment, it is evident that a properly sized SATA configuration can satisfy Exchange storage requirements for most small to mid-range businesses. In some cases, such as SATA configurations using the MSA1500 and

MSA20 enclosure, it does not meet Exchange 2007 performance guidelines, and therefore is not an

HP recommended solution.

26

Page 27: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Proper sizing of the Exchange storage solution is important, and planning should be focused

on performance over capacity. The HP Storage Planning Calculator is a useful tool for storage

planning and provides results based on disk controller, storage device, and drive type. In this test environment, the HP SPC provided storage results that performed well and met the Microsoft Exchange performance guidelines. Testing showed that the SATA configurations could meet or exceed Exchange performance guidelines at the cost of less I/O capability, higher read and write

latencies, and longer message queues. Testing MSA1500 with MSA20 SATA drives is not listed as a

valid HP storage configuration in the HP Storage Planning Calculator. A drive configuration in one

storage device may not meet performance requirements in another storage device.

When selecting a storage solution, it is important to evaluate the dependability and anticipated life

span, described as the mean time between failures (specifically the mean time between failures (MTBF) of a system expressed in hours based on 24 x 7 operations). While SATA drives can save

cost for some Exchange deployments compared to SAS and SCSI, the MTBF is considerably less. MTBF for a SATA drive is estimated at 600,000 hours, and 1.4 million hours for SAS drives (results

may vary based on duty cycle). Organizations that consider their Exchange capabilities as a vital business function, or have stringent service license agreement (SLA) system recovery requirements, may not view SATA as a viable option. Whichever drive technology best suits your Exchange

environment, success depends on sizing and testing the solution before deployment.

27

Page 28: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Best practices and results This section describes best practices for IT professionals who operate and support small to mid-range

business environments. It describes the major differences between Exchange 2007 and previous versions, and provides information about infrastructure planning, deployment, and migration to

Exchange Server 2007.

This section also shows the results of testing the MSA products and drive performance to assist in

determining a best storage solution for the small to mid-range business environment. Individuals not familiar with Exchange 2007 should refer to Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 for an introduction to

new features and changes in the Exchange 2007 architectural design.

This section also includes recommendations for customers who plan to upgrade from previous versions of Exchange, or migrate from other messaging systems. The following list of best practices and recommendations should be considered by Exchange and system administrators to successfully

deploy Exchange in their messaging environments.

Exchange administration

• Planning: Before you deploy Exchange 2007, plan properly to ensure smooth adaptation into

the organizational environment. Begin by assessing the business requirements and the current IT computing environment. Analyze the Active Directory logical and physical topologies to

determine which Exchange 2007 organizational topology best fits your environment size and

messaging needs. In addition, determine whether to adapt a centralized or a decentralized

administrative model.

• Exchange Jetstress: After determining the Exchange 2007 physical disk I/O requirements, use the

Jetstress tool to verify that the design disk performance can meet the expectations of the anticipated

production environment. Do this in a test lab prior to the production environment deployment.

• Storage planning tools: Available storage planning tools include an Exchange Storage Planning

Calculator, an HP Storage Planning Calculator (SPC), and a Sizing and Configuration Tool.

You can use an Exchange Storage Planning Calculator to simplify planning. Microsoft provides an Exchange 2007 Mailbox Server Role Storage Requirements Calculator spreadsheet that can be downloaded from:

http://msexchangeteam.com/files/12/attachments/entry438481.aspx

HP has developed the HP Storage Planning Calculator (SPC) for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007. This tool was designed to provide guidelines for disk, storage controller, and enclosure planning

for successful Exchange Server 2007 deployments; it is available for download from:

http://h71019.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/511755-0-0-0-121.html

HP also provides the HP Sizing and Configuration Tool for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007. This tool provides HP ProLiant server and storage sizing guidelines for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 solutions and can be downloaded from:

http://h71019.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/483374-0-0-0-121.html

28

Page 29: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Performance and recovery

To optimize performance and provide fault tolerance, place databases and logs on separate

physical disks. This enables recovery of data to the point of failure. If the log files and databases are maintained on the same disk, and the disk fails, recovery to the point of the last backup is the

only possibility.

Performance is also improved because database I/O operations are random, whereas log file

operations are sequential. The combination of both on the same physical disk degrades I/O

performance. The following files should be partitioned on separate disks:

• Microsoft Windows operating system files

• Exchange Server application files

• Exchange database files on the active copy

• Exchange log files on the active copy

• Exchange database files on the passive copy

• Exchange log files on the passive copy

Storage administration

Drive selection for an Exchange 2007 deployment depends on various environmental factors, and

requires careful considerations, such as budget, business requirements, and I/O requirements. SATA

drives may seem like an affordable solution; if properly sized, they can support an organization’s Exchange 2007 storage requirements. However, other factors, such as MTBF and the shorter life

cycles of SATA drives, should be considered.

Organizations that consider Exchange Servers as a mission-critical resource should examine the

increased durability of SAS and SCSI drives. The evolutionary replacement of SCSI with SAS is strong

in many environments. This is driven by the SAS technology’s advantages, such as quadrupling SCSI bandwidth for substantial performance gains, and accommodating up to 128 SAS devices on a single

controller, as compared with 16 for parallel SCSI. In addition, the ability to mix high-performance

SAS and low-cost SATA drives on the same backplane provides unprecedented flexibility.

The trade-off of the lower cost for the SATA drives can also mean lower I/O capabilities. Even though

a SATA configuration may meet the organization’s Exchange 2007 user I/O requirement, consider how the reduced I/O will impact backup and recovery and the organization’s SLAs.

Improper storage design leads to bottlenecks and poor performance. It is important to meet storage

capacity requirements for an Exchange deployment. To ensure proper performance, the proposed

solution must have the correct number of spindles to meet the I/O requirements. Use the following

formula to determine the total number of spindles for RAID 10:

1.25 × [(Mailboxes × IOPS per mailbox/IOPS per spindle) + %Read I/O]/[%Reads I/O +

(%Write I/O/2)] = Spindles

Server administration

The Microsoft Exchange Server Best Practices Analyzer (ExBPA) Management Pack works with

Exchange Server 2003 to monitor performance after server deployment. The Management Pack

29

Page 31: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Conclusion

For customers who are migrating or planning deployment to Exchange Server 2007, this paper provides technical guidance, best practices, and supporting data for businesses that support 1,000

users on a single array.

Experienced HP Exchange engineers have thoroughly tested several arrays and disk types in the

MSA array family. The insights reported here can help you evaluate the performance data and

implement the proven best practices, ensuring a trouble free environment. Among the best practices identified during testing are:

• Tools are critical. Use sizing tools to properly plan the environment, and use the Jetstress tool to

verify that the proposed design will meet performance expectations.

• Separate databases and logs. Place databases and logs on separate physical disks to optimize

performance and provide fault tolerance.

• HP recommends using RAID 10. For the best performance, use RAID 10 for both Exchange

databases and log files. If you have budget constraints, consider RAID 5 for the database disks, but always place the Exchange log files on a RAID 10 volume.

• SATA is an affordable option. The trade-off is a lower life cycle, less reliability, and a potential impact to SLAs.

• SAS/SCSI is the choice for mission-critical messaging environments. With its higher I/O

capabilities, SAS/SCSI offers the most reliability.

This white paper has identified the proven technical best practices. Evaluating the presented trade-offs can help you implement a solution that satisfies your budget and organizational priorities.

We value your feedback

In order to develop technical materials that address your information needs, we need your feedback. We appreciate your time and value your opinion. The following link will take you to a short survey

regarding the quality of this paper:

http://hpwebgen.com/Questions.aspx?id=12046&pass=41514

31

Page 32: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix A. Bill of materialsDevice Number Part Number Description

Exchange Servers (Qty: 2) 1 417453-001 HP DL380G5 5110 1G Entry US Server

1 418319-B21 HP X5110 DL380G5 Kit

2 397413-B21 HP 4GB FBD PC2-5300

2 397415-B21 HP 8GB FBD PC2-5300 2x4GB Kit

8 431935-B21 72GB 15k 2.5 Single Port HP SAS Drive

1 264007-B21 HP Slim 8X/24X DVD-ROM Drive

1 381513-B21 HP Smart Array P800 Controller

2 A8002A HP FC2142SR 4GB PCI-e HBA

1 399771-B21 HP RPS 350/370/380G5/385G2 Kit

Domain Controllers(Qty:3) 1 470062-904 HP DL380G4 X.3.4 2P CH SP4240 Server

2 375004-B21 HP 4GB PC2-3200 2X2048 2 Rank

2 404714-001 36.4GB Ultra3 SCSI 15,00 rpm U320 Drive

4 350964-B22 300GB 10k Ultra320 UNI Hard Drive

MS Load Gen Clients(Qty 4) 1 289349-002 ProLiant DL320 G2 P2.26GHz /533-512KB

80GB

Storage Devices

2 418800-B21 HP StgWks 70 Modular Smart Arry ALL

36 431786-B21 HP 120GB 5.4k HP 2.5 SATA 1yr Wty HDD

25 431868-B21 HP 146GB 10K RPM SAS Hard Drive

1 335921-B21 HP Storage Works MSA20 Storage Enclosure

12 395473-B21 HP 500GB 7.2K HP SATA 1yr Wty HDD

12 375861-B21 HP 300GB 15K SAS 3.5 SP HDD

2 302969-B21 HP Storage Works MSA30 DB Enclosure

2 347708-B22 HP 146GB 15K RPM SCSI Hard Drive

1 AA986A HP StorageWorks 1500sc Modular Smart Array

2 218231-B22 HP MSA 1000 / 1500 256 Cache

2 418408-B21 HP StorageWorks MSA60 Array

24 375861-B21 HP 300GB 15K SAS 3.5 SP HDD

24 395473-B21 HP 500GB 7.2K HP SATA 1yr Wty HDD

32

Page 33: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix B. HP Storage Planning Calculator The tests described in this document are presented to help you evaluate the performance

characteristics of SAS, SATA, and SCSI drive technologies and identify the impacts of an Exchange

2007 deployment in a direct storage configuration. The HP Storage Planning Calculator (SPC) for Exchange 2007 was designed to determine the best configuration for each storage device and drive

type needed to support an Exchange user workload. This tool ensured the proper sizing for each

drive technology to accommodate our Exchange test environment.

The testing also provided an opportunity to validate the accuracy of the SPC by comparing the

recommended solutions with the actual performance data. Tests indicated that all the storage

recommendations from the SPC met the Exchange 2007 storage requirements within Exchange

performance guidelines and with consistent results.

The MSA1500 tests (using the MSA20 with 500-GB SATA) did not meet performance testing criteria. However, that configuration solution was not listed in the HP Storage Planning Calculator; it was added to the tests to validate HP’s recommendation that the MSA20 be used only for file storage, disk-to-disk backup, and data archiving. These tests also indicate that the same drive configuration

can provide satisfactory results for one storage device (MSA60 with 500-GB SATA), but may perform

poorly for another storage device (MSA1500 with 500-GB SATA).

Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, and Figure 10 show the HP Storage Planning Calculator’s recommended configurations based on the Exchange user workloads.

33

Page 34: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 6. MSA60 with 300-GB 15K RPM SAS 3.5

34

Page 35: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 7. MSA60 with 500-GB 7.2K RPM SAS 3.5

35

Page 36: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 8. MSA70 with 146.8-GB 10K RPM SAS 2.5

36

Page 37: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 9. MSA70 with 120-GB 5.4K RPM SATA 2.5

37

Page 38: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 10. MSA1500 with 146.8-GB 15K RPM SCSI

38

Page 39: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix C. Microsoft Exchange Server 2007

From small home offices to large enterprises, messaging systems have become mission-critical business applications. The need for fast communication, both in-house and from business to business, has placed higher performance demands on these systems. At the same time, messaging systems are

carrying increasingly critical information that must be tracked and stored for business and regulatory

reasons. Microsoft’s Exchange Server 2007 has been designed to meet these requirements and the

business demand for increased performance.

As you consider whether to move a current Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 implementation to

Microsoft Exchange Server 2007, it is important to understand the application’s new capabilities and

their implications for your current infrastructure.

New capabilities for Exchange Server 2007

64-bit platform

With Exchange 2003, the limitations on available memory created a performance bottleneck. Exchange 2003 uses a maximum of 3 GB of virtual address space (using the 3-GB switch); this limits the number of users on a mailbox server and the size of the mailboxes.

Exchange Server 2007 uses a 64-bit environment, allowing the server to take advantage of the

database cache and additional server RAM. With previous Exchange versions, memory limitations increased the probability that the application would read data from disk, thus increasing disk I/O

and impacting performance. The larger memory capabilities in Exchange Server 2007 minimize

database I/O and improve the overall performance.

Role-based servers

Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 introduces role-based deployment. The assigned server roles allow

the required features and components to perform a specific function in the messaging environment. Depending on how a messaging system will be deployed and distributed, distinct server roles can be

configured as follows:

• Client Access Server (CAS). The CAS role is responsible for all client interaction, with the

exception of the direct Messaging Application Programming Interface (MAPI) remote procedure

call (RPC). It includes interactions with Outlook Web Access, Outlook Anywhere, POP, IMAP, ActiveSync, and Web Services.

• Hub Transport (Hub). The Hub role is responsible for all routing; it provides better journaling for improved compliance and improved availability.

• Mailbox Server. The Mailbox Server role is the MAPI RPC end point. It stores all mailbox items, searches for performance improvements, and provides the high-availability features of Local Continuous Replication (LCR) and Cluster Continuous Replication (CCR). The Mailbox Server role

makes use of the recommended maximum of 32-GB memory and supports up to 50 storage

groups (SGs) with an improved checkpoint depth.

• Unified Messaging (UM). The UM role enables remote access services such as Fax, voice, and

cell access; it is not a messaging system requirement.

39

Page 40: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

• Edge Transport. The Edge Transport Server role was designed to handle Internet-facing SMTP

relay and provides increased security; it is not a messaging system requirement. The Edge

Transport role requires the use of a dedicated server that is not in the Active Domain.

The CAS server role, Hub server role, and Mailbox server role can coexist on a single server in any

combination. The assignment of roles is based on capacity and performance requirements.

Implications for the infrastructure

Reduced I/O profiles

Because it requires an investment in new 64-bit hardware, the move to Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 presents an opportunity to consider the potential impact of the reduced I/O profiles on the

total infrastructure.

• With more data and instructions available for processing in RAM, fewer servers may be needed

because each server can host more mailboxes. Of course, sufficient memory needs to be allotted

for other CPU processes, such as antivirus and recovery.

• It may be possible to deploy lower performing storage solutions because of the lower burden

placed on disk I/O performance. In some cases, DAS may provide sufficient performance. In

others, organizations may find that the benefits of centralized storage management using a

storage area network (SAN) outweigh the cost savings of a DAS solution.

• With the constantly increasing dependence on messaging systems and the use of larger attachments, organizations can expect that mailbox databases will continue to grow. Although

Exchange 2007 supports larger mailbox sizes, there is still a need to balance user demands against infrastructure considerations such as database manageability and server workload.

Backup, recovery, and VSS

The continuing growth in the number of users and the volume of user information will result in

requiring Exchange Servers to host more data. With more data to back up and less time to perform

the backups, it is important to consider ways you can perform backups faster. Because Exchange

2007 allows for many more mailbox databases, administrators can allocate fewer users to each

mailbox database. By keeping mailbox databases to a manageable size, you can enable faster restores and decrease server workload.

Microsoft is encouraging Exchange 2007 administrators to use its embedded, host-based Volume

Shadowcopy Service (VSS) technology to perform backups. However, many users will choose to

continue to deploy online streaming backups, either as a first step in implementation or as a valid

method for simplifying processes or leveraging concurrency.

VSS technology is critical for applications that require consistent, point-in-time copies of open files and databases. With Exchange 2007, VSS backups can be restored to an Exchange Recovery

Storage Group on any Exchange Server in the organization.

Continuous replication

With its built-in, host-based continuous replication capabilities, Exchange 2007 provides log shipping

services to remote storage or remote hosts, which enhances overall availability. Local Continuous Replication (LCR) allows the database to be replicated to alternate storage on the same host, with log

replay keeping the passive database up-to-date. Cluster Continuous Replication (CCR) provides for

40

Page 41: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

logs to be shipped to a passive cluster node where the replicated logs are replayed into the passive

database. In addition to quick recovery, CCR provides important benefits in other backup and

recovery operations:

• Ability to perform daily incremental backups with weekly full backups from a remote data copy

• Ability to minimize the reliance of backup windows by backing up the passive LCR or CCR

copy of the database

• Ability to perform off-host backups with the passive cluster node in CCR

Microsoft has made many changes to Exchange Server to address customers’ ongoing needs for functionality and performance. HP has done extensive testing to determine how these new

capabilities impact the storage configuration and has defined best practices for implementing

Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 with HP server and storage products.

41

Page 42: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix D. Microsoft Exchange Load Generator The Microsoft Exchange Load Generator (LoadGen) is a simulation tool that measures the impact of MAPI clients on the Exchange Server. It measures the Exchange Server response to a configured

user workload.

In our testing, we used LoadGen to simulate the workload of 1,000 users with 750-MB mailboxes on

the Exchange Server in each storage configuration. We developed a customized configuration that would populate mailboxes to the appropriate size and produce the correct amount of messaging

activity to simulate a heavy user profile. User activities included send and receive messages, browse

the calendar, browse public folders, and download offline address books. For our test, the modified

LoadGenConfig.xml yielded an average mailbox size of 750 MB per user.

Figure 11 shows the user profile action in each test simulation and identifies the type and number of

mail activities conducted for each user.

42

Page 43: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 11. Action profile

Figure 12 shows the successful completion of an 8-hour LoadGen test run that performed 130,492

tasks with no task exceptions. The results show 132 tasks per user day for 1,000 users.

Figure 13 and Figure 14 show the amount of mail that was sent and received (24,000 messages

sent and 87,000 messages received). The averages were 24 sent and 87 received per user; these

averages fall within the test criteria for a heavy user profile (estimated at 20 sent and 80 received).

43

Page 44: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 12. Load Generator test results

Figure 13. Messages sent

44

Page 45: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Figure 14. Messages received

45

Page 46: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix E. Software

• Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise X64 Edition (Build 3790: Service Pack 2) (Exchange Servers)

• Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (Build 3790: Service Pack 2) (Domain

Controllers/LoadGen Clients)

• Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 Version 08.00.0685.018

• Microsoft Exchange Load Generator Version 08.01.0136.000

• Microsoft Exchange Jetstress 2007 Version 08.01.0001.000

• HP Smart Start 7.80

• HP ProLiant Support Pack 7.91A

Software updates • Hotfix for Windows Server 2003 (KB926139)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB925902)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB926122)

• Security Update for Windows Media Player 6.4 (KB925398)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB929123)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB930178)

• Security Update for Microsoft .NET Framework, Version 2.0 (KB928365)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB932168)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB933729)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB935839)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB935840)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB936021)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB936782)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB941202)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB921508)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB924667-v2)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB943460)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB941569)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB944653)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB944653)

• Security Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB941568)

• Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB941568)

• Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB927891)

46

Page 47: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

• Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB932596)

• Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB933360)

• Update for Windows Server 2003 (KB936357)

47

Page 48: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

Appendix F. Hard drive technologies SATA or Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (ATA) is the predecessor of the traditional Parallel Advanced Technology Attachment (PATA) that is common in most workstations and personal computers. PATA, also called Integrated Drive Electronics (IDE) was the standard bus interface on

the original IBM AT computer. ATA is the official American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard term.

Most motherboards include two ATA 40-pin connectors; each is capable of supporting two devices (one master and one slave). SATA is based on serial signaling technology, unlike current IDE hard

drives that use parallel signaling. SATA offers performance as high as 3.0 Gb/s per device. Because

SATA uses only four signal lines, it allows for much more compact (and less expensive) cables as compared with PATA. It also offers features such as hot-swapping and Native Command Queuing

(NCQ).

The SATA port multiplier contains provisions for many drives to be connected to the same SATA, unlike

the master/slave limitation of PATA. In addition, SATA drives may be plugged into Serial Attached

SCSI (SAS) controllers and communicate on the same physical cable as native SAS disks. SAS disks, however, may not be plugged into a SATA controller.

SCSI is a high-performance peripheral interface that can independently distribute data among

peripherals attached to the computer. Unlike ATA, SCSI incorporates the instructions needed to

communicate with the host computer. As a result, the host computer is more efficient in performing its user-oriented activities.

SCSI is a specification for a peripheral bus and command set defined in ANSI standard

X3.131-1986. SCSI drives are usually more suitable for high-end computer systems that require the

maximum possible performance. SCSI provides for higher data transfer rates and less CPU load than

ATA but has higher cost and complexity in the setup. Also, SCSI supports more devices than ATA. Another important advantage of SCSI is that most SCSI products are backward-compatible. A faster, newer drive can still work with the older and slower controller but with less performance.

SAS evolved as the new serial-based technology when the SCSI hard drive reached its physical speed

threshold of 320 MB/s. SAS technology extends the benefits of parallel SCSI, such as high reliability, enterprise-class performance, and manageability; it also provides an increase in I/O performance.

The SAS standard uses a hard-drive interface that is seamlessly compatible with both existing SATA

and SAS hard drives, thereby allowing a user to mix SAS and SATA drives in the same system for greater flexibility in deploying storage solutions. Another capability of SAS allows users to attach

up to 128 SAS storage devices, an improvement from the 16 devices that could exist in a SCSI environment.

48

Page 49: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

For more information

This section lists references and their online locations.

Note

Some of the following links are secure websites that require an HP Passport registration. HP Passport is a single login service that lets you register with HP Passport-enabled websites using a single user identifier and password of your choice.

HP solutions and whitepapers

• HP Customer Focused Testing

http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise/cache/324315-0-0-0-121.html

• HP Storage Planning Calculator (SPC) for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007

http://h71019.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/511755-0-0-0-121.html

• HP Sizing and Configuration Tool for Microsoft Exchange Server 2007

http://h71019.www7.hp.com/activeanswers/Secure/483374-0-0-0-121.html

• HP StorageWorks 1500cs Modular Smart Array - Overview and features

http://h18004.www1.hp.com/storage/disk_storage/msa_diskarrays/san_arrays/msa1500cs/

index.html

• HP StorageWorks 60 Modular Smart Array - Questions and answers

http://h18002.www1.hp.com/storage/disk_storage/msa_diskarrays/drive_enclosures/msa60/

qa.html

• HP StorageWorks 70 Modular Smart Array - Overview and features

http://h18002.www1.hp.com/storage/disk_storage/msa_diskarrays/drive_enclosures/msa70/

index.html

• HP ProLiant DL380 G5 Server series − overview

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/15351-15351-3328412-241644­241475-1121516.html

• HP ProLiant DL320 G5 Server series - overview

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/15351-15351-3328412-241644­241475-3201178.html

Microsoft Exchange 2007

• Microsoft TechNet: Exchange Server library

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996058.aspx

• UPDATE 2: Exchange 2007 processor and memory recommendation

http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/16/432222.aspx

49

Page 50: 5371_Best Practices for Microsoft Exchange 2007 With HP Servers & Storage in Mid-range Environments

• Exchange 2007 Mailbox Server role storage requirements calculator spreadsheet

http://mseschangeteam.com/files/12/attachments/entry438481.aspx

• Microsoft Exchange Load Generator

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=ddec1642-f6e3-4d66-a82f­8d3062c6fa98&displaylang=en

• Planning the Server and Storage Architecture

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb738142(EXCHG.80).aspx

• Microsoft Exchange Server Best Practices Analyzer http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/

exchange/bb288481.aspx

© 2008 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. The only warranties for HP products and services are set forth in the express warranty statements accompanying such products and services. Nothing herein should be construed as constituting an additional warranty. HP shall not be liable for technical or editorial errors or omissions contained herein. Intel and Xeon are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the U.S. and other countries. Microsoft and Windows are U.S. registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. 4AA1-5679ENW, February 2008

50

nSightUser
Oval