HP vs HDS

Hi,

Looking at some subsystems, down to an HP EVA5000 or HDS 9580 -
anybody got any thought/comments

TIA

On 2 Apr 2004 08:41:22 -0800, (Gary) wrote:

Hi,

Looking at some subsystems, down to an HP EVA5000 or HDS 9580 -
anybody got any thought/comments

TIA

Gary, I'm biased (working for HP and all). What kind of information would
you like?

I admin'd systems for over 13 years before getting into consulting. The
"virtualization" capabilities of the EVA are huge time/life savers - that
is, if you (and your DBAs) implement them. You can almost eliminate the
need for any manual tablespace/database file reconfiguration due to
bottlenecks on the LUN level.

Compared to bus-based storage configurations this is a huge benefit for
most sites - the main exception being those whose environment has a very
low rate of change.


--- jls
The preceding message was personal opinion only.
I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,
and certainly not my employer.
(get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:10:47 GMT, jlsue
wrote:

On 2 Apr 2004 08:41:22 -0800, (Gary) wrote:

Hi,

Looking at some subsystems, down to an HP EVA5000 or HDS 9580 -
anybody got any thought/comments

TIA

Gary, I'm biased (working for HP and all). What kind of information would
you like?

I admin'd systems for over 13 years before getting into consulting. The
"virtualization" capabilities of the EVA are huge time/life savers - that
is, if you (and your DBAs) implement them. You can almost eliminate the
need for any manual tablespace/database file reconfiguration due to
bottlenecks on the LUN level.

This is a nice feature that almost every other array vendor has
*except* HDS. It makes life a little more difficult in terms of
storage management but it's what allows them to give a 100% storage
availability guarentee, something no other array vendor does. If our
9980's restrict access to data for any reason of the array they start
writing checks to us. Of course I haven't seen it yet so I can't say
if they really pay or not. :-]

And the performance is insane, about the only other array that
comapres is the new EMC DMX. Of course I hate EMC so....

~F

Faeandar wrote in message . ..
SNIP
... but it's what allows them to give a 100% storage
availability guarentee, something no other array vendor does. If our
9980's restrict access to data for any reason of the array they start
writing checks to us. Of course I haven't seen it yet so I can't say
if they really pay or not. :-]

And the performance is insane, about the only other array that
comapres is the new EMC DMX. Of course I hate EMC so....

~F

I don't think HDS actually writes you a check... I think the fine
print says that you get a discount on your next order... not actual
cash in your hand... I want to say it was like 20% off next order...
but like you, our 9980v has had ZERO downtime since day 1.... and yes,
the performance is insane! 8^)

john

On 7 Apr 2004 03:07:33 -0700, (John S.) wrote:

Faeandar wrote in message . ..
SNIP
... but it's what allows them to give a 100% storage
availability guarentee, something no other array vendor does. If our
9980's restrict access to data for any reason of the array they start
writing checks to us. Of course I haven't seen it yet so I can't say
if they really pay or not. :-]

And the performance is insane, about the only other array that
comapres is the new EMC DMX. Of course I hate EMC so....

~F

I don't think HDS actually writes you a check... I think the fine
print says that you get a discount on your next order... not actual
cash in your hand... I want to say it was like 20% off next order...
but like you, our 9980v has had ZERO downtime since day 1.... and yes,
the performance is insane! 8^)


Uptime guarantees are more of a contractual thing - based on the purchase
of certain hardware configurations and service options. It's not a
technology-specific thing per se.

--- jls
The preceding message was personal opinion only.
I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,
and certainly not my employer.
(get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)

It's based on the configuration, which is part and parcel of the
limitation of the HDS array. Because of the way they've architected
the system, if you configure LUN's in a certain manner there is no
potential for array-based restriction of data access due to any
failure, multiple or single. At least that's the theory and we
haven't been disappointed yet.

So yes it's a hardware configuration issue but one you can only get
from HDS. It has nothing to do with service contracts though.

~F

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 22:36:58 GMT, jlsue
wrote:

On 7 Apr 2004 03:07:33 -0700, (John S.) wrote:

Faeandar wrote in message . ..
SNIP
... but it's what allows them to give a 100% storage
availability guarentee, something no other array vendor does. If our
9980's restrict access to data for any reason of the array they start
writing checks to us. Of course I haven't seen it yet so I can't say
if they really pay or not. :-]

And the performance is insane, about the only other array that
comapres is the new EMC DMX. Of course I hate EMC so....

~F

I don't think HDS actually writes you a check... I think the fine
print says that you get a discount on your next order... not actual
cash in your hand... I want to say it was like 20% off next order...
but like you, our 9980v has had ZERO downtime since day 1.... and yes,
the performance is insane! 8^)


Uptime guarantees are more of a contractual thing - based on the purchase
of certain hardware configurations and service options. It's not a
technology-specific thing per se.

--- jls
The preceding message was personal opinion only.
I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,
and certainly not my employer.
(get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)
ther the

Faeandar wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:10:47 GMT, jlsue
wrote:

On 2 Apr 2004 08:41:22 -0800, (Gary) wrote:

Hi,

Looking at some subsystems, down to an HP EVA5000 or HDS 9580 -
anybody got any thought/comments

TIA

Gary, I'm biased (working for HP and all). What kind of information would
you like?

I admin'd systems for over 13 years before getting into consulting. The
"virtualization" capabilities of the EVA are huge time/life savers - that
is, if you (and your DBAs) implement them. You can almost eliminate the
need for any manual tablespace/database file reconfiguration due to
bottlenecks on the LUN level.

This is a nice feature that almost every other array vendor has
*except* HDS. It makes life a little more difficult in terms of
storage management but it's what allows them to give a 100% storage
availability guarentee, something no other array vendor does. If our
9980's restrict access to data for any reason of the array they start
writing checks to us. Of course I haven't seen it yet so I can't say
if they really pay or not. :-]

And the performance is insane, about the only other array that
comapres is the new EMC DMX. Of course I hate EMC so....

~F


From a performance perspective, the EVA can perform just as well as a
HDS or any other array on the market...given like for like, capacity
for capacity or more realitstically dollar for dollar configurations.

"Larry" wrote in message
m...

From a performance perspective, the EVA can perform just as well as a
HDS or any other array on the market...given like for like, capacity
for capacity or more realitstically dollar for dollar configurations.

Perhaps, but that is the difference. The EVA only has a total of 4 2Gb
fibre connections, 2GB of cache in each controller, and a max of 35TB Raid-0
capacity. The HDS / HP XP can have up to 32 2Gb fibre or 64 1Gb fibre, up
to 128GB of cache, and 129TB of usable raid protected capacity.

In article , (Larry) writes:

From a performance perspective, the EVA can perform just as well as a
HDS or any other array on the market...given like for like, capacity
for capacity or more realitstically dollar for dollar configurations.

Actually... there is often a lot of blather regarding
disk subsystem performance. To cut down on vendor blather,
one should check their SPC numbers:

http://www.storageperformance.org/results.html

Rob

In article , "R Klute" writes:
"Larry" wrote in message
m...

From a performance perspective, the EVA can perform just as well as a
HDS or any other array on the market...given like for like, capacity
for capacity or more realitstically dollar for dollar configurations.

Perhaps, but that is the difference. The EVA only has a total of 4 2Gb
fibre connections, 2GB of cache in each controller, and a max of 35TB Raid-0
capacity. The HDS / HP XP can have up to 32 2Gb fibre or 64 1Gb fibre, up
to 128GB of cache, and 129TB of usable raid protected capacity.


Yeah. Scale-up versus scale-out.

Price out that 9980 with 128 GBytes of RAM and 1024 drives. I'll
match the capacity and spend a lot less. As a benefit, the EVA config
will have multiple frames. A single frame isn't an advantage. It
sits in one spot in one datacenter.

Rob