EMC blows benchmark away - again
NFS before, CIFS now
Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Backup/Recovery
EMC has blown another file-serving benchmark away with a result more than four times faster than the previous best.
A pretty much all-flash VG8 (VNX gateway)/VNX 5700 array scored 661,951 operations per second on the SPECsfs2008 CIFS benchmark. The overall response time was 2.1msecs.
SECsfs2008 CIFS benchmark results
The tested system had 560 x 200GB flash drives and 21 x 300GB, 15,000rpm SAS disk drives for a total of 101.2TB and eight file systems. The total exported capacity was 77.455TB. The VNX5700 had five X-blades, one of which was a stand-by blade.
The previous best result was also held by EMC, with a Celerra VG8 Server Failover Cluster using 2 Data Movers (1 standby) and a Symmetrix VMAX array. This set-up achieved 142,979 ops/sec and a 1.92msec overall response time.
The best non-EMC result was achieved by a NetApp FAS3210 with 64,292 ops/sec and a 1.50 response time.
EMC trounced its competitors on the SPECsfs2008 NFS benchmark recently. Once more an almost all-flash system has shown the door to disk-based competitors on a SPEC benchmark. ®
COMMENTS
Tell Us the Money
These benchmarks need to be overhauled so that they show $/IOPS (or equivalent) and $/GB (end-user available, not raw) at a number of capacity points such as 1TB, 10TB and 100TB. And all costs should be over 5 years so that they include whatever insane year 4 and 5 maintenance prices these vendors think they can get away with. Only then will they be useful for end-users to compare one product against another in something approaching their own environments.
Cars.
Come on guys.. you can't criticize EMC because other companies submitted something more 'real world'. Who brings a practical family car to a horsepower war and brags about the affordability or the practical aspect? You know there are those out there that by the seemingly unaffordable high-spec no-real-world purpose cars.
the purpose is marketing
EMC wants to create/reinforce the idea that EMC is 'fast' and doesn't care that customers will purchase spinning disk configurations that probably cannot deliever a tiny fraction of this level of performance.
I repeat: they don't care.
It's the same as base model and 'sport' model cars. One of them is the deliever high performance, in many cases well beyond what the owner/driver can extract and certainly beyond legal use of public roads, and the base model is to capitalize on the image of the car at a lower price point.
EMC wants to sell VNXs and it ideally would have customers who naively believe that they are 'better' and 'faster' than the competition. If you look at the SP utilization on a NS-480 or -960, I didn't think the VNX's massively more powerful processors was about crushing benchmarks with SSD. I think those powerful processors are completely necessary to be able to use thin provisioning, automatic storage tiering and, someday, block-level dedupe using primarily spinning disk.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
Data control in the cloud
Cloud based data management
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
