8/6/2019 IBM XIV Gen 3 Storage http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ibm-xiv-gen-3-storage 1/55 IBM XIV ® Gen3 Storage System Model 2810-114 120,000 Mailbox Resiliency Exchange 2010 Storage Solution Tested with: ESRP – Storage Version 3.0 Tested Date: July 7, 2011 Authors: Aviad Offer i , David Hartman ii , Betti Porat iii Document version: 1.4
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
XIV Gen3 Storage System Model 2810 Type 114 ............................................................... 4Reliability/Protection ...................................................................................................... 6Thin Provisioning ........................................................................................................... 6Ease of Management ..................................................................................................... 7Lower Power Consumption .............................................................................................. 9Snapshots .................................................................................................................... 9IBM System x3650 Servers ............................................................................................ 9
Contact for Additional Information .................................................................................... 20Test Result Summary ..................................................................................................... 21
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 26Appendix A. Test Results ................................................................................................. 28
This document provides information on the IBM XIV Gen3 2810 Storage System storage solutionfor Microsoft Exchange Server, based the Microsoft Exchange Solution Reviewed Program (ESRP)– Storage program*. For any questions or comments regarding the contents of this document,
please see the section titled Contact for Additional Information.
*The ESRP – Storage program was developed by Microsoft Corporation to provide a commonstorage testing framework for vendors to provide information on their storage solutions forMicrosoft Exchange Server software. For additional information on the Microsoft ESRP – Storage program, please click:
Disclaimer This document has been produced independently of Microsoft Corporation. Microsoft Corporation
expressly disclaims responsibility for, and makes no warranty, express or implied, with respectto, the accuracy of the contents of this document.
Please refer to the IBM disclaimer, located at the end of this document for additional information
Features
This solution implements the Mailbox Resiliency features in Exchange Server 2010; specificallythe database availability group feature. A database availability group (DAG) is a set of up to 16Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Mailbox servers that work together to provide automaticdatabase-level recovery from a database, server, network or storage failure. Mailbox servers in a
DAG monitor each other for failures and can take corrective action as required to help preventservice interruptions. Solutions that implement this feature can deliver a very robust Exchangeenvironment.
More information on this feature can be found by visiting:
A two DAG solution comprising 24 mailbox servers was created that supported a total of 120,000 mailboxes with a mailbox size of 1GB. Each server hosted 5,000 users, and had 6 activedatabases, with 833 users per database. Within the DAG, there were two copies of every
database; one local, and one on another server connected to a second XIV Gen3 storage array.This configuration can provide for both high-availability, and disaster-recovery scenarios.Database replication is handled by the mailbox servers over Ethernet. Two XIV Gen3 frameswere used, and the databases and copies were equally distributed across them*. A failure of anydatabase will cause the database to mount and become active on whichever server is hostingthe database copy, in a manner transparent to the end users.
*NOTE: We tested one identical half of this solution, that is 12 mailbox servers hosting 10,000active mailboxes connected to a single XIV, to represent the ‘worst-case’ failure scenario (i.e. anentire site).
The solution in this paper features the IBM XIV Gen3 Storage System together with IBM System
x3650 Intel based servers.
The following sections describe the actual hardware components used in this solution.
Solution Description
XIV Gen3 Storage System Model 2810 Type 114
As one of the newer members of IBM’s family of storage systems, the XIV Gen3 Storage Systemis an enterprise-class array offering superior performance, solid-protection, and incredible easeof manageability. This solution leverages the new XIV Gen3 system with 2TB drives with ausable capacity of 161TB per frame.
Exclusive to this storage system is the inherent self-optimizing grid-based architecture whichprovides massive parallelism. Massive parallelism design distributes data in parallel across allavailable storage resources, by harnessing all the processing power available to the system. Dueto this design, hot spots (heavily saturated storage components) normally associated with poorstorage configuration and/or workload variances, is eliminated. The XIV Gen3 architecturedelivers continuous optimal performance and eliminates the need for dubious tuning activities onthe storage.
Built using industry-standard Intel/Linux components -- a fully equipped XIV Gen3 Model 2810-114 Storage System is supplied with fifteen data modules, 6 out of those are interface modules.
Each module consists of one Intel Westmere® Quad-core 64-bit CPU, 24 GB fully buffered RAM,and twelve 2 TB SAS-2 7,200 RPM hard disks.
In comparison to Fibre-Channel based disks, the XIV Gen3 has more disk density allowing for asmaller physical storage footprint, which in turn translates to significantly lower power & coolingrequirements. The unique design of the architecture can also yield similar or better performance.
By design, the XIV Gen3 Storage System architecture is self-healing as data in the backgroundis automatically checked for integrity and mirrored to provide data redundancy. Should the XIVGen3 lose a 2 TB disk, the system triggers an event alerting IBM support while rebuilding the
faulty disk automatically. The disk rebuild process is transparently handled without userintervention and can finish in as few as 60 minutes, even when the XIV Gen3’s capacity is 100%allocated.
Consistent performance is maintained even during the loss of a hard disk. The rebuild time of losing one disk does not degrade performance, unlike other competing storage systems whichexhibit a significant degradation in performance.
Should a storage sub-component fail on monolithic storage systems, approximately 50% (CPUand read/write cache) of performance is lost. This not only impacts productivity, but could haveserious implications affecting application performance. Losing an entire data module1 on the XIV
Gen3 Storage System would temporarily account for only 1/15th
reduced performance.
To maintain data redundancy, all data on the storage and memory cache is mirrored. The cachedata is never stored in the same data module. This not only provides data cache protection, buteliminates loss of data in case a data module’s power is lost or interrupted.
Each data module is supplied with two field replaceable hot-swappable power supplies, and threeUPS devices provide interim power in the event of interrupted or lost main power. Enough poweris provided to allow safe cache destaging and a graceful shutdown of the XIV Gen3 StorageSystem.
The XIV Gen3 Storage System also supports synchronous and asynchronous Remote Mirroring,
allowing for replication of data to a remote XIV Gen3 Storage System. Additionally, XIV Gen3supports seamless integration with Windows Server 2008 R2 clustering, which enables intelligentautomatic failover/failback using array-based replication, all within the familiar clustering MMC.
Thin Provisioning
This feature permits the logical allocation of storage to appear larger than what is physicallycommitted. This provides the ability to resize storage pools and volumes even after defininginitial storage sizes.
This feature cannot only reduce upfront storage costs by avoiding purchasing needless unusedstorage, but reduces the hardware and the associated environmental footprint. A larger footprint
is typically more expensive because it requires more hard disks, electrical power, coolingrequirements, disk expansions enclosures, floor space, and management overhead.
Thin provisioning can reduce or eliminate the impact of future storage capacity issues whencurrent storage limits have been reached. This occurs when storage has quickly outgrown
1Loss of a data module compared to a data interface module has lesser impact in performance.
original capacities. It can be a difficult task to predict how data will grow as storage usage isoften highly dynamic in nature. In an effort to circumvent future capacity issues, storage can beappropriately sized beforehand or resized later.
Figure 2 below depicts how to easily resize an XIV Gen3 volume.
Figure 2) Resizing an XIV Gen3 volume.
Important: While thin provisioning enables allocated storage to appear larger than what isphysically committed, constant monitoring of current available physical storage space is vital toprevent capacity issues. Storage writes destined to logical capacity not allocated with enoughphysical storage can hinder performance, delete snapshots, and cause storage operations to faildue to lack of space. Prior to reaching this limit, storage threshold alerts should be configuredand enabled to warn administrators of the condition. Regular monitoring of storage events andproactive action can prevent these events from occurring.
Another innovative feature is the ability to consume disk space only when actual data is writtento the volume. This means that while a LUN may be allocated 100GB of capacity, if only 10GB isin actual use, only 10GB is physically allocated & reported. This concept is referred to as avolume’s hard or physical utilization. This can result in a significant savings in both space andcost. This differs from traditional storage systems, in which the entire pre-allocated disk space isflagged as 0’s and marked as used storage. Traditional storage systems quickly outgrow spaceby immediately pre-allocating storage due to the inefficient method of marking free space asreserved. Whereas on the XIV Gen3 Storage System it is tracked by the system as free space,and can be used for other hosts, thus maximizing overall storage utilization.
Note: It is important to realize that this concept differs from that of thin provisioning. Also, this
feature does not apply to free space within the EDB file(s).
Ease of Management
Managing the XIV Gen3 Storage System compared to other storage is markedly different.Typical storage management tasks are eliminated and handled automatically by the XIV Gen3Storage System including automatic provisioning, self-tuning of data placement, read/writecache tuning, self-healing, automatic rebuilding of failed disk drives, and automatic phasing-out
or fencing of failed components. The modular, redundant architecture dramatically reducesimpact to service levels from such events.In general, storage management can be a daunting task, requiring extensive storage experienceand specialized training. These barriers have been removed, as the XIV Gen3 Storage System
provides a highly intuitive GUI called XIV Gen3 Storage Management, with a near zero learningcurve.
A less experienced storage administrator with no XIV Gen3 Storage System experience can
allocate storage and map volumes to hosts in as little as a few minutes. Storage managementtasks take less time, allowing storage to be utilized faster.
Figure 3 below is a sample screen shot of the XIV Gen3 Storage Management interface.
Figure 3) The highly intuitive XIV Gen3 Storage Management interface
A full-featured command-line management interface, XCLI is also provided for scripting tasks,management, configuration, and monitoring.
We assume the host attached to the IBM XIV Gen3 is already configured with the vendor specific SAN drivers and isproperly zoned in the SAN fabric or a point-to-point connection is used.
The IBM XIV Gen3 Storage System is equipped with high-capacity SAS-2 disks. SAS-2 diskdrives provide significantly better GB/$ value than Fibre-Channel (FC) disks while offeringsuperior performance relative to SATA-based disks. SAS-2 disks also require less power
consumption than FC disks. Since SAS-2 disk drives are generally much higher in capacity thanFC disks – this translates to requiring less hard drives, cooling, and power for a given capacity.
Snapshots
A key component of the XIV Gen3 Storage System is the inherent snapshot capabilities whichdeliver near-instantaneous volume replicas**. A total of 12,000 snapshots are supported. Asnapshot is simply a point-in-time image of data used for quick data retrieval purposes.Transportable snapshots are often used for offloaded backups of Exchange databases, whichremove the backup load from the production servers.
The snapshot method employed by the XIV Gen3 Storage System uses an efficient method
called Redirect-on-Write. The Redirect-on-Write snapshot-based method addresses the typicalperformance overhead associated with the Copy-on-Write snapshot-based method. For example,during a Copy-on-Write snapshot operation, new writes destined to target storage must waituntil the original data is copied to the snapshot area. This step is eliminated using Redirect-on-Write as the new writes are written immediately to the snapshot area resulting in fastersnapshots. The Redirect-on-Write snapshot method does not impact the source volumes as doCopy-on-Write based snapshots.
For more information on the XIV Gen3 Storage System visit the IBM website at:
http://www.xivstorage.com
IBM System x3650 Servers
The System x3650 is a rack-mount server designed for critical and high-performance computing.
For this particular solution, twelve System x3650 model 7979AC1 systems containing 2 quadcore e5450 3.0 GHz Intel Xeon CPUs were used. Each System x3650 was equipped with 24 GBof internal memory.
**Actual snapshot operation times are measured on the IBM XIV. Monitoring of an ad-hoc or scheduled snapshot
operation from the TSM or IBM Data Protection interface known as the VSS requester may appear longer as there isadditional communication occurring between the requester client and server.
Solution Description This solution demonstrates the performance capabilities utilizing two XIV Gen3 Storage Systemarrays and 24 System x3650 servers supporting a total of 120,000 mailboxes using a target0.11 IOP profile (0.11 IOP - with added 20% headroom – 0.13 IOP as tested). The mailbox size
is 1 GB.
Important: Though this solution was tested using 120,000 mailboxes, additional storage toaccommodate snapshots or frequent mailbox move operations may be required for largertransaction log volumes. Carefully review these parameters before finalizing your final targetlimits. The as-tested design allows for up to twelve mailbox server failures (six per DAG) and asingle storage array failure.
Storage hardware:
2 x XIV Gen3 Storage Systems Model 2810 Type 114
XIV Gen3 Storage System Software Version: 11.0.0
24 GB physical memory/data module Twelve 2 TB drives per data module 180 SAS-2 drives (2 TB, 7,200 RPM) per array
Form Factor: Rack-mount Rack Height: 42u
Exchange servers:
24 x System x3650 servers:o 2 quad-core e5450 3Ghz Intel Xeon CPUso 24 GB RAM/Server
Windows Server 2008 (x64) – Enterprise Edition, R2, Service Pack 1o .NET Framework 3.5o Microsoft Multipath I/O
Figure 5 below depicts a high-level representation of this solution.
Note: The FC switches are not diagrammed to keep the overall diagram simplified.The brackets are to imply each FC switch as described in the section above.
As mentioned in the previous sections, the XIV Gen3 Storage System provides SAN connectivityvia 24 FC ports or 22 iSCSI Ethernet ports. For this solution, only the Fibre Channel ports areutilized.
The rear of the XIV Gen3 Storage System’s patch panel contains access to all six host interfacemodules, each of which contains FC port designations 1, 2, 3, and 4. For each Exchange server,a minimum of 6 paths were used to provide SAN connectivity to the XIV Gen3 Storage System.
Two FC switches are used to establish 12 physical connections to the XIV Gen3 Storage System.
Each switch has six FC ports connected. Each FC switch port is connected to each interfacemodule’s FC port #3 or FC port #1. This provides an FC connection to all FC Interface Moduleson the XIV Gen3 Storage System.
This configuration provides multiple redundant paths to the XIV Gen3 Storage System and
guarantees each host has a path to each host interface module. This allows the hosts to evenlydistribute I/O workload across all host interface modules to obtain the best possible performance
For each host to achieve optimal performance, each host FC adapter’s max queue depth was setto 128.
Each FC port on each interface module concurrently supports up to 1,400 IOPs. There are a totalof 4 FC ports on each interface module. Two of the four are available for target FC connections.The remaining two are reserved for remote replication.
To calculate the preferred max queue depth for each host, divide total number of hosts definedin your zone by 1,400.
Zoning Layout
The FC ports on each host are connected via both Fibre channel switches.
To help provide a starting reference for this test environment refer to how XIV Gen3 hostinterface modules are connected in each SAN A, and SAN B
Note: Zone XIV_SERENITY contains all XIV Gen3 host interface modules.
Zone Name Switch A - ZoneMembers
Switch B – ZoneMembers
Serenity_XIV_HOST_20 XIV20HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV20HBA 1 Port 1XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_121 XIV121HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV121HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_122 XIV122HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV122HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_25 XIV25HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV25HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_23 XIV23HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV23HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_30 XIV30HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV30HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_31 XIV31HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV31HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_21 XIV21HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV21HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)Serenity_XIV_HOST_33 XIV33
HBA 1 Port 0XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV33HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_24 XIV24HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV24HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity a (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_27 XIV27HBA 1 Port 0
XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV27HBA 1 Port 1
XIV_Serenity a (port 1)
Serenity_XIV_HOST_32 XIV32
HBA 1 Port 0XIV_Serenity (port 3)
XIV32
HBA 1 Port 1XIV_Serenity a (port 1)
Table 1) FC zoning configuration
Important: Before deploying FC switches into production carefully run 24 hour tests and closelymonitor the FC activity for errors. If errors are observed, take action by ensuring that zoning
parameters are correctly defined. Not following these guidelines may not guarantee reliableoperation of your storage environment and could result in data loss.
The XIV Gen3 2810 System Storage array can be found in the Windows Server Catalog here:
The ESRP-Storage program focuses on storage solution testing to address performance andreliability issues with storage design. However, storage is not the only factor to take intoconsideration when designing a scale-up Exchange solution. Other factors which affect theserver scalability are: server processor utilization, server physical and virtual memorylimitations, resource requirements for other applications, directory and network servicelatencies, network infrastructure limitations, replication and recovery requirements, and clientusage profiles. All these factors are beyond the scope for ESRP-Storage. Therefore, the numberof mailboxes hosted per server as part of the tested configuration may not necessarily be
viable for some customer deployments.
For more information on identifying and addressing performance bottlenecks in an Exchangesystem, please refer to Microsoft's Troubleshooting Microsoft Exchange Server Performance,available at:
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=23454.
Targeted Customer Profile
This overall solution was designed toward medium to large organizations that require high-availability and disaster-recovery features inherent in a Mailbox Resiliency configuration, whileminimizing administration complexity. The System x3650 and XIV Gen3 Storage System offerscale-out flexibility to expand the solution as the Exchange requirements increase in number of users, mailbox size, or server failure tolerance. The target environment profile for this solutionincludes:
The following tables summarize the testing environment:
Simulated Exchange Configuration:
Number of Exchange mailboxessimulated
120,000
Number of Database AvailabilityGroups (DAGs)
2
Number of servers/DAG 12
Number of active mailboxes/server 10000
Number of databases/host 6
Number of copies/database 2
Number of mailboxes/database 1667
Simulated profile: I/O’s per secondper mailbox (IOPS, include 20%
headroom)
0.13 (0.11 with 20% headroomtested)
Database LUN size 2TB
Log LUN size 300GB
Total database size for performancetesting (per XIV Gen3 frame)
142.5TB
% storage capacity used byExchange database**
88%
**Storage performance characteristics change based upon the utilization percentage of theindividual disks. Tests that use a small percentage of the storage (~25%) may exhibit reducedthroughput if the storage capacity utilization is significantly increased beyond what is tested in
this paper. Actual (hard) capacity used will vary due to the way the XIV Gen3 Storage Systemphysically allocates disk space. See the previous section for further information on how the XIVGen3 allocates & tracks physical disk space.
Best Practices Exchange server is a disk-intensive application. Based on the testing run using the ESRPframework, we recommend the following to improve the overall storage performance.
For Exchange 2010 guidance on storage design, please visit:
1. To accurately size final formatted volume size on the XIV Gen3 Storage System, stage the
target volume size prior to implementing. By default, the minimum volume extent size iscreated in blocks of 17 GB. To get close to target volume size, divide the target size byextent size of 17 GB. For example, if the target volume size is 650 GB, divide 650/17 =38 Extents (approximately 646 GB). After partitioning, and formatting volume, the finalsize will be reduced even more. Factor in another 17 GB, to compensate for the file-
system overhead. 646 GB + 17 GB will provide 663 GB unformatted drive space. Formatthe newly created volume and check the available or free space to determine if this meetstarget needs. Otherwise, increase or reduce the volume to get a more accurate targetsize.
Note: "* 1GB=1000MB, 1MB=1000KB, 1KB=1000 bytes"
663GB translated is actually 663x1000x1000x1000/1024/1024/1024 = 617GB on windows.
2. For optimal performance, format the database volumes using a 64k Windows allocationunit size. The volumes used to store log data can be formatted using default allocationunit size, as there are no significant gains increasing this from the default value.
3. Increasing the Queue Depth setting on the HBA Fibre Controller may increase overallIOPS. Refer to your manufacturer’s HBA documentation for detailed support on how thisvalue can be modified.
4. Increasing the number of FC HBA’s can provide additional IOPS and resiliency options.Make sure to not define more than 24 paths to the storage, as this the current limit at thistime.
5. We strongly recommend implementing Mailbox Resiliency. This allows for using a fewernumber of larger LUNS for your databases and yields significantly increased storageperformance. Designing your Exchange XIV Gen3 storage configuration with fewer andlarger LUNs is often preferable, and we have observed performance and capacityincreases on the order of 25% when configured in this manner.
6. Troubleshooting any latency on the XIV Gen3 Storage System can be monitored viastandard tools such as Microsoft Performance Monitor or the XIV Gen3 Storage Systemmonitoring tools. These tools can help determine where and when the heaviest disk I/O
patterns are occurring, and what the data transfer rates are, which helps identify andisolate potential I/O bottlenecks.
7. Assuming all storage components are functioning, balanced, and configured correctly,most Exchange Server 2010 storage latency issues are caused by an insufficient number
Test Result Summary This section provides a high level summary of the test data from the ESRP test runs and thelinks to the detailed html reports which are generated by the ESRP testing framework. Pleaseclick on the underlined headings below to view the html report for each test.
Reliability
A number of tests in the framework are designed to check storage system reliability; these testsrun for 24 hours. The goal is to verify that the storage can handle high Exchange I/O load for anextended period of time. Both the log and database files are analyzed for integrity after thestress test to ensure that no database and/or log corruption has occurred.
The following list provides an overview: (clicking on the underlined word will display the htmlreport generated after the reliability test runs)
There were no errors reported in the saved eventlog file.
There were no errors reported during the database and log checksum processes.
Storage Performance Results
The primary storage performance testing is designed to exercise the storage with the maximumsustainable Exchange type of I/O for 2 hours. The test is designed to show how long it takes forthe storage to respond to an I/O under load. The data below is the sum of all of the logical diskI/O’s and average of all the logical disks I/O latency in the 2 hour test duration. Each server islisted separately and the aggregate numbers across all servers are listed as well.
Individual Server Metrics:The sum of I/O’s across databases and the average latency across all databases on a per server
There are two tests reports in this section. The first one is to measure the sequential read rate ofthe database files, and the second is to measure the recovery/replay performance (playingtransaction logs into the database).
Database Read-only Performance
The test is to measure the maximum rate at which databases could be backed up via VSS. Thefollowing table shows the average rate for a single database file.
MB read/sec per database 79.6047222
MB read/sec total per server 477.628333
Transaction Log Recovery/Replay Performance
The test is to measure the maximum rate at which the log files can be played against thedatabases. The following table shows the average rate for 500 log files played in a single
database. Each log file is 1 MB in size.
Average time to play one Log file (sec) 1.600813
Conclusion This testing validates this Exchange ESRP – Storage submission for the IBM XIV Gen3 StorageSystem under the stated configuration parameters, and demonstrates that this storage array isan ideal repository for Exchange Server 2010 data.
The new availability of 2TB SAS-2 drives within the XIV Gen3 platform aligns well with
Microsoft’s desire for larger mailbox capacities at a lower price point than FC drives withoutsacrificing reliability. These drives also allow for a smaller environmental footprint, increasing thestorage density envelope without creating the sprawl, management, and recoverability issuesassociated with JBOD-based deployments. The larger storage capacities tested here alsohighlight the scalable performance of XIV Gen3’s modular design & controller architecture.Testing also confirmed the enormous benefits of the new cache size support of 3600GB
The incredible ease of management, advanced data distribution technology, self-tuningcapability, and automatic (and extremely quick) drive rebuild capability offer Exchangeadministrators and storage architects the ideal tools to deliver a robust, yet easily managedExchange storage solution. Advanced features such as copy services, thin provisioning, full MPIO
& VSS support offer additional flexibility and support in terms of performance, availability, quickbackup/recovery, and ensure optimal, efficient usage of the storage subsystem with minimalfuss.
This document was developed by storage solution providers, and reviewed by the MicrosoftExchange Product team. The test results/data presented in this document are based on the testsintroduced in the ESRP test framework. Customers should not quote the data directly for his/her
pre-deployment verification. It is still necessary to go through the requisite exercises to validatethe storage design for a specific customer environment.
ESRP program is not designed to be a benchmarking program; tests are not designed to obtain
the maximum throughput for a giving solution. Rather, it is focused on producingrecommendations from vendors for the Exchange application. So the data presented in thisdocument should not be used for direct comparisons among the differing vendor solutions.
Appendix A. Test Results This section contains Jetstress reports for Stress, Performance, Streaming Backup, and SoftRecovery. All server test results were reviewed by Microsoft, and had similar performanceresults. We include the results from only one of the servers here, to make this section more
readable.
Stress Testing
Server 1: XIV23Stress Test Result ReportTest Summary
Overall Test Result Pass
Machine Name XIV23
Test Description
Test Start Time 7/7/2011 4:45:49 PM
Test End Time 7/8/2011 4:48:36 PMCollection Start Time 7/7/2011 4:48:34 PM
Collection End Time 7/8/2011 4:48:21 PM
Jetstress Version 14.01.0225.017
Ese Version 14.00.0639.019
Operating System Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise Service Pack 1(6.1.7601.65536)
has 489 samples.7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.xmlhas 478 samples queried.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.htmlwas saved.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Verifying database checksums ...
7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.blghas 411 samples.7/7/2011 4:58:22 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.htmlwas saved.7/7/2011 4:58:22 AM -- Verifying log checksums ...7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- L:\1 (13 logs processed), L:\2 (14 logs processed), L:\3 (14 logs processed), L:\4 (13 logsprocessed), L:\5 (14 logs processed) and L:\6 (13 logs processed)7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Application_2011_7_7_4_58_25.evt issaved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\System_2011_7_7_4_58_25.evt is saved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\XmlConfig_2011_7_7_4_58_25.xml wassaved.
7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- Jetstress testing has ended.7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Jetstress testing begins ...7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Preparing for testing ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Attaching databases ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Preparations for testing are complete.7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Starting transaction dispatch ..7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Database cache settings: (minimum: 192.0 MB, maximum: 1.5 GB)7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Database flush thresholds: (start: 15.3 MB, stop: 30.7 MB)
7/7/2011 10:44:31 AM -- Database read latency thresholds: (average: 20 msec/read, maximum: 100 msec/read).7/7/2011 10:44:31 AM -- Log write latency thresholds: (average: 10 msec/write, maximum: 100 msec/write).7/7/2011 10:44:37 AM -- Operation mix: Sessions 8, Inserts 40%, Deletes 20%, Replaces 5%, Reads 35%, LazyCommits 70%.7/7/2011 10:44:37 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 15000 ms).7/7/2011 10:44:37 AM -- Attaining prerequisites:
has 488 samples.7/7/2011 12:46:52 PM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_10_44_31.xmlhas 479 samples queried.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_10_44_31.htmlwas saved.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Verifying database checksums ...7/7/2011 4:12:54 PM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)7/7/2011 4:12:54 PM -- Performance logging has ended.7/7/2011 4:12:54 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_12_46_55.blghas 411 samples.7/7/2011 4:12:57 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_12_46_55.html
Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/8/2011 4:48:36 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_16_46_2.blg has5760 samples.7/8/2011 4:48:36 PM -- Creating test report ...7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.7 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_16_46_2.xml has5750 samples queried.
7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Instance2572.1 (complete), Instance2572.2 (complete), Instance2572.3 (complete),Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.blghas 489 samples.7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.xmlhas 478 samples queried.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.html
was saved.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Verifying database checksums ...7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.blghas 411 samples.
7/7/2011 4:58:22 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.htmlwas saved.
7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\System_2011_7_7_4_58_25.evt is saved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\XmlConfig_2011_7_7_4_58_25.xml was
saved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- Jetstress testing has ended.7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Jetstress testing begins ...7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Preparing for testing ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Attaching databases ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Preparations for testing are complete.7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Starting transaction dispatch ..7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Database cache settings: (minimum: 192.0 MB, maximum: 1.5 GB)7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Database flush thresholds: (start: 15.3 MB, stop: 30.7 MB)7/7/2011 10:44:31 AM -- Database read latency thresholds: (average: 20 msec/read, maximum: 100 msec/read).7/7/2011 10:44:31 AM -- Log write latency thresholds: (average: 10 msec/write, maximum: 100 msec/write).7/7/2011 10:44:37 AM -- Operation mix: Sessions 8, Inserts 40%, Deletes 20%, Replaces 5%, Reads 35%, Lazy
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_10_44_31.xml
has 479 samples queried.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_10_44_31.html
bound: 1449551000.0, upper bound: none)7/7/2011 1:32:10 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/7/2011 1:32:10 AM -- JetInterop batch transaction stats: 51642, 51821, 51569, 52178, 51273 and 51780.7/7/2011 1:32:10 AM -- Dispatching transactions ends.7/7/2011 1:32:10 AM -- Shutting down databases ...7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Instance2572.1 (complete), Instance2572.2 (complete), Instance2572.3 (complete),Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.blghas 489 samples.7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.xmlhas 478 samples queried.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.htmlwas saved.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).
7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Verifying database checksums ...7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)
processed), L:\5 (14 logs processed) and L:\6 (13 logs processed)7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Application_2011_7_7_4_58_25.evt issaved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\System_2011_7_7_4_58_25.evt is saved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\XmlConfig_2011_7_7_4_58_25.xml wassaved.7/7/2011 4:58:25 AM -- Jetstress testing has ended.7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Jetstress testing begins ...7/7/2011 10:44:18 AM -- Preparing for testing ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Attaching databases ...7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Preparations for testing are complete.7/7/2011 10:44:25 AM -- Starting transaction dispatch ..
7/7/2011 12:46:52 PM -- Instance2572.1 (complete), Instance2572.2 (complete), Instance2572.3 (complete),Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/7/2011 12:46:52 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_10_44_31.blghas 488 samples.7/7/2011 12:46:52 PM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 12:46:55 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.7 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_16_46_2.xml has5750 samples queried.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_16_46_2.htmlwas saved.7/8/2011 4:49:09 PM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).7/8/2011 4:49:09 PM -- Verifying database checksums ...7/8/2011 8:19:50 PM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)7/8/2011 8:19:50 PM -- Performance logging has ended.
7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Instance2572.1 (complete), Instance2572.2 (complete), Instance2572.3 (complete),Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.blghas 489 samples.7/7/2011 1:32:12 AM -- Creating test report ...7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.0 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/7/2011 1:32:15 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.xmlhas 478 samples queried.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_6_23_29_30.html
was saved.7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 30000 ms).7/7/2011 1:32:16 AM -- Verifying database checksums ...7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- F: (100% processed), G: (100% processed) and H: (100% processed)7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/7/2011 4:58:20 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.blghas 411 samples.
7/7/2011 4:58:22 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DBChecksum_2011_7_7_1_32_16.htmlwas saved.
7/8/2011 4:48:36 PM -- Creating test report ...7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 17.5 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 17.7 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 17.6 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.
7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/8/2011 4:49:08 PM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_7_16_46_2.xml has
7/8/2011 9:47:11 PM -- Backing up databases ...7/9/2011 12:45:00 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/9/2011 12:45:00 AM -- Instance2572.1 (100% processed), Instance2572.2 (100% processed), Instance2572.3(100% processed), Instance2572.4 (100% processed), Instance2572.5 (100% processed) and Instance2572.6 (100%processed)7/9/2011 12:45:00 AM -- C:\Program Files\ExchangeJetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DatabaseBackup_2011_7_8_21_47_2.blg has 355 samples.7/9/2011 12:45:00 AM -- Creating test report ...
7/9/2011 12:45:02 AM -- C:\Program Files\ExchangeJetstress\Gen3ESRP12\DatabaseBackup_2011_7_8_21_47_2.html was saved.7/9/2011 12:45:02 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Application_2011_7_9_0_45_2.evt issaved.7/9/2011 12:45:02 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\System_2011_7_9_0_45_2.evt is saved.7/9/2011 12:45:02 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\XmlConfig_2011_7_9_0_45_2.xml was
saved.7/9/2011 12:45:02 AM -- Jetstress testing has ended.7/9/2011 2:09:29 AM -- Jetstress testing begins ...7/9/2011 2:09:29 AM -- Preparing for testing ...7/9/2011 2:09:36 AM -- Attaching databases ...7/9/2011 2:09:36 AM -- Preparations for testing are complete.7/9/2011 2:09:36 AM -- Starting transaction dispatch ..
generated), L:\5 (100% generated) and L:\6 (100% generated)7/9/2011 3:03:37 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/9/2011 3:03:37 AM -- JetInterop batch transaction stats: 21842, 21736, 21786, 21936, 22163 and 22080.7/9/2011 3:03:37 AM -- Dispatching transactions ends.7/9/2011 3:03:37 AM -- Shutting down databases ...7/9/2011 3:03:39 AM -- Instance2572.1 (complete), Instance2572.2 (complete), Instance2572.3 (complete),Instance2572.4 (complete), Instance2572.5 (complete) and Instance2572.6 (complete)7/9/2011 3:03:39 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_9_2_9_43.blg has215 samples.7/9/2011 3:03:39 AM -- Creating test report ...7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 20.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.
7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.1 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 20.1 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.2 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 20.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.3 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 20.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.4 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 20.3 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.5 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 20.2 for I/O Database Reads Average Latency.
7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Writes Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Instance2572.6 has 0.5 for I/O Log Reads Average Latency.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- Test has 0 Maximum Database Page Fault Stalls/sec.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- The test has 0 Database Page Fault Stalls/sec samples higher than 0.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_9_2_9_43.xml has214 samples queried.7/9/2011 3:03:40 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\Performance_2011_7_9_2_9_43.htmlwas saved.
7/9/2011 3:03:43 AM -- Performance logging started (interval: 4000 ms).7/9/2011 3:03:43 AM -- Recovering databases ...7/9/2011 3:18:14 AM -- Performance logging has ended.7/9/2011 3:18:14 AM -- Instance2572.1 (869.0619265), Instance2572.2 (868.5315255), Instance2572.3(869.3271269), Instance2572.4 (869.8575279), Instance2572.5 (870.1227283) and Instance2572.6 (870.6531292)7/9/2011 3:18:14 AM -- C:\Program Files\Exchange Jetstress\Gen3ESRP12\SoftRecovery_2011_7_9_3_3_40.blg has
216 samples.7/9/2011 3:18:14 AM -- Creating test report ...
improvements or alterations to the products, programs and services described in this document, includingtermination of such products, programs and services, at any time and without notice. Any statements
regarding IBM’s future direction and intent are sub ject to change or withdrawal without notice, andrepresent goals and objectives only. The information contained in this document is current as of the initial
date of publication only, and IBM shall have no responsibility to update such information.
Performance data for IBM and non-IBM products and services contained in this document was derived
under specific operating and environmental conditions. The actual results obtained by any partyimplementing any such products or services will depend on a large number of factors specific to such
party’s operating environment and may vary significantly. IBM makes no representation that these results
can be expected or obtained in any implementation of any such products or services.
THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED “AS-IS” WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY, EITHEREXPRESS OR IMPLIED. IBM EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR INFRINGEMENT.
References in this document to IBM products, programs, or services does not imply that IBM intends tomake such products, programs or services available in all countries in which IBM operates or doesbusiness. Any reference to an IBM program or product in this document is not intended to state or imply
that only that program or product may be used. Any functionally equivalent program or product, that doesnot infringe upon IBM’s intellectual property rights, may be used instead. It is the user’s responsibility toevaluate and verify the operation of any non-IBM product, program or service.
The provision of the information contained herein is not intended to, and does not grant any right or
license under any IBM patents or copyrights. Inquiries regarding patent or copyright licenses should be
made, in writing, to:
IBM Director of Licensing
IBM CorporationNorth Castle DriveArmonk, NY 10504-1785U.S.A.
IBM, the IBM logo, System x, XIV, XIV Gen3, and System Storage are trademarks or registeredtrademarks of International Business Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries or both.
Microsoft, Windows, and Exchange Server are trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States,