FLASH STORAGE FOR SQL SERVERFLASH STORAGE FOR SQL SERVER

Speaker: Sumeet BansalFusion‐io

San Francisco SQL Server User GroupSan Francisco SQL Server User GroupMarch 2011

Mark Ginnebaugh User Group LeaderMark Ginnebaugh, User Group Leader, mark@designmind.com

Flash storage: Is it right for you?

Sumeet Bansal Principal Solutions Architect, Fusion-io

March 9, 2011 Microsoft Office San Francisco

Who am I?

Until June 2009

• Vice President of IT & DBA at Wine.com

• Served at Wine.com for a decade

• Introduced Fusion-io at Wine.com in Late 2008

NNow

• Principal Solutions Architect at Fusion-io

• Evangelize through presentations demos webinars etc• Evangelize through presentations, demos, webinars etc

• Help Clients discover ways of maximizing efficiency and performance and at the same time cutting costs

• Still a huge fan of Wine.com

Dream Database Architecture (DDA)

DDA impliesDDA implies

• High Performance

• High Availabilityg y

• Easy to Manage

• Energy Efficient

• Cost Effective

Dream Database Architecture (DDA)

SAN

ioMemory is core of DDAioMemory is core of DDA

ioMemoryL1, L2 & L3CPU Cache

DRAM

Mill isecond (10E-3)Nanosecond (10E-9) ACCESS DELAY IN TIME

What is possible – Wine.com

Metric Pre Fusion-io Post Fusion-io Improvement “Boost” Customer Facing Improvement

Average duration of a SQL transaction

345 milliseconds 88 milliseconds 300% 4 Times Website pages faster, each page has multiple DB requests. Reducing Time fetching data improves customer experience, leads to better conversion.

Time taken to take a full backup of the largest database

Time taken to restore a full backup of the largest d t b

2 hours

3 hours

6 minutes

15 minutes

1900%

1100%

20 Times

12 Times

During backups, customer experience is no longer hindered.

Faster time to recovery, less loss exposure in major downtime.

database

Average number of read/write operations waiting in a queue to complete

0.4 0.008 4900% 50 Times Less time for customer to wait on another customers long running operation.

Number of transactions in 1 hour window that took more than 500 milliseconds

3011 163 1700% 18 Times Website pages faster, each page has multiple DB requests. Reducing Time fetching data improves customer experience, leads to better conversion. More cart transactions per second.

What is possible - Wine.com

Business Value Gained

• 50x fewer average transactions in queue• Decreased Cart Abandonment and increased revenue by at least 2%.

• Reduced daily backup window from 2 hrs down to 6 minutes• Gained extra revenue for a 2 hour duration every day of the year.• If avg. 2 hour revenue gained (off peak hours) is $2K, the total revenue

gain per year is $730Kgain per year is $730K

• Year End invoices posted in a single day that used to take 1 month• Books closed faster than ever.

• Zero database blocking with rollbacks• Saved considerable time in warehouse and finance with no lost

inventory, duplicate inventory purchasing, and tedious research / reportingreporting

Measuring performance on Fusion-io

Try to measure application performance

• Use profiler to track average SQL transaction completion time• Use perfmon to track various aspects:

– Logical Disk:Disk Reads/sec (Read IOPS)– Logical Disk:Disk Writes/sec (Write IOPS)– Logical Disk:Disk Reads Bytes/sec (Read Throughput)– Logical Disk:Disk Writes Bytes/sec (Write Throughput)– Logical Disk:Avg Disk Sec/Read (Read Latency)

Logical Disk:Avg Disk Sec/Write (Write Latency)– Logical Disk:Avg Disk Sec/Write (Write Latency)– Use the Physical disk object if need to track on disk level in a

RAID configuration

Measuring performance on Fusion-io

Following are some suggested tests on a non-production environment

• Perform maintenance tasks like backup/restore/rebuild of indexes• Use multiple connections simultaneously to read or write to a table• Run most frequently executed stored procedures and time them• Measure latency in an active High Availability scenario like Database

MirroringMirroring

Addressing High Availability

• Database Mirroringg• Synchronous• Asynchronous

• Multi-site clusteringMulti site clustering• Requires Windows 2008 R2• Requires a third-party data replication software

– Data Keeper by Steel Eye TechnologiesData Keeper by Steel Eye Technologies– Double-take

• SQL Server replication• Specific to certain environmentsSpecific to certain environments• Works on Database Object level

Addressing High Availability

• Neverfail• http://www.neverfailgroup.com/windows-apps/sql-server-high-

availability.html

• Marathon• http://www.marathontechnologies.com/sql-high-

availability.html

Mirroring vs. Clustering

Mirroring Clusteringg• Provides protection against data corruption

(page level corruption) because there are two separate physical data stores.

• Starting from SQL Server 2008, the system

g• Does not protect against data corruption

because there is a single data store on the shared storage.

• One has to either restore from a backup g yautomatically fixes corrupt pages (in enterprise edition)

• Mirror failover can be completely automated

por run a dbcc repair command with allow for data loss option

• Both options will result in data loss

using a witness server• Starting from SQL Server 2008, the transaction

logs for mirroring are compressed before sending to the mirror. So much better network utilizationutilization

Mirroring vs. Clustering

Mirroring Clusteringg• Ordinarily, the databases on the mirror server

are not readable. However, if enterprise edition is present, one can create read-only snapshots on the mirror server

g• Reading from a separate node, without

impacting the primary is not possible

• The snapshot creation is a sub-second operation regardless of the size of the database

• The snapshot can be dropped and t d t i t l ( 5 recreated at an interval (say every 5

minutes) to keep up with the data• This helps to gain better value from the

mirroring server

Mirroring really is better

• Mirroring is fast• Mirroring is fast

• Mirroring allows for a distributed architecture

• Shared storage is not really geared for performance, it is geared for capacity

• A different architecture (Distributed) is needed to drive performance

Validation

• IBM HP and DELL are OEMs and expanding on relationships• IBM, HP, and DELL are OEMs and expanding on relationships

• Microsoft: SQL Server 2011 (Denali)• Will provide clustering options without requiring shared storage• There will be multiple mirrors per server possible

• Oracle• Flashcache• Dataguard with complete automatic failover

Sneak Peek

• DirectCache• DirectCache• Use ioMemory as cache• Automatic Data management• Increase performance and economize on existing SAN infrastructureIncrease performance and economize on existing SAN infrastructure• Will support Clustered environments too

DirectCache

SAN

ioMemoryL1, L2 & L3CPU Cache

DRAM

Mill isecond (10E-3)Nanosecond (10E-9) ACCESS DELAY IN TIME

T H A N K Y O U

To learn more or inquire about speaking opportunities, please contact:o ea o e o qu e about spea g oppo tu t es, p ease co tact:

Mark Ginnebaugh, User Group Leadermark@designmind.com