for a database workload id recommend investing in either a good SSD for an SLOG 
or just going pure SSD for the pool the database is on. once that is done i 
suspect any performance differences between virtual and bare metal will be 
small enough to ignore. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 8:15 AM, Humberto Ramirez <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Specifically on the performance of Windows VM's a few things you can try:
> 
> - Check the property "model" of your disks and make sure is "virtio"
> If its IDE add an extra disk with virtio enabled, install virtio,
> shutdown, make the change on the original disk and start again
> 
> vmadm get {UUID} | json disks
> 
> 
> - Set "compression": "lz4"     "block_size": 131072   (This one can
> only be set at creation)
> 
> - Set  zfs sync=disabled  on the VM's HD     ie:     zfs set
> sync=disabled zones/{UUID}-disk0
> This is dangerous but a good way to determine if ZIL is the culprit
> 
> - Play with different versions of the KVM virtio drivers I got up to
> 8%~12% better performance than the ones from Joyent,
> 
> https://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virtio-win/direct-downloads/archive-virtio/
> 
> 
> For security, backup and take a snapshot of the disk(s) before trying
> any of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would recommend to test performance with CrystalDisk mark from
> inside the VM with every change (You could get some artificial results
> due to caching etc.)
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> CrystalDiskMark 5.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2015 hiyohiyo
>                           Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> * MB/s = 1,000,000 bytes/s [SATA/600 = 600,000,000 bytes/s]
> * KB = 1000 bytes, KiB = 1024 bytes
> 
>   Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1197.028 MB/s
>  Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1385.574 MB/s
>  Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :    74.490 MB/s [ 18186.0 IOPS]
> Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   107.978 MB/s [ 26361.8 IOPS]
>         Sequential Read (T= 1) :   687.428 MB/s
>        Sequential Write (T= 1) :   482.795 MB/s
>   Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :    15.460 MB/s [  3774.4 IOPS]
>  Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :    13.381 MB/s [  3266.8 IOPS]
> 
>  Test : 100 MiB [C: 22.9% (57.3/249.9 GiB)] (x1)  [Interval=5 sec]
>  Date : 2015/10/21 14:55:31
>    OS : Windows Server 2008
> 
> 
> zpool status
> 
>        NAME                       STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
>        zones                      ONLINE       0     0     0
>          mirror-0                 ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039588CB2F5Ad0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598D2E102d0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>          mirror-1                 ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598D2E15Ed0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598E304BAd0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>          mirror-2                 ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598E304C2d0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598E318DEd0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>          mirror-3                 ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598E318F2d0  ONLINE       0     0     0
>            c0t5000039598E319C6d0  ONLINE       0     0     0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:37 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>> hi all. i know the basic question is a tired one, so feel free to ignore. 
>> i'm hoping someone can provide a recommendation based on real-world 
>> experience with smartos and this particular software stack: windows server 
>> 2008/2012 with sybase ads, for a small office client/server application.
>> 
>> i have a small customer (15 desktops) whose business is totally managed by a 
>> single client/server application. the latest version of the application has 
>> moved to using a sybase ads backend. the end-user software runs on a 
>> terminal server, as before, so i already have that covered. what i do not 
>> have covered is the hardware for the new sybase ads portion. the vendor 
>> requires windows 2008/2012 (standard or essentials) for their propriety 
>> installation/configuration of the sybase database and their related 
>> update/backup/management tools.
>> 
>> i have smartos successfully running in several places with small services 
>> (samba3 domain controller, webserver, zimbra on linux vm, and a few windows 
>> vms running terminal services for applications). these work great, with disk 
>> performance being the only remotely questionable aspect. i do not have 
>> experience with large i/o workloads. there are a *lot* of conversations on 
>> the list with varying recommendations/suggestions for different situations. 
>> the most straight forward of the suggestions are "use the hardware joyent 
>> uses in their datacenters" and "test it yourself and go from there" ...
>> 
>> this being a small customer (and myself just being a consultant) makes 
>> affording enterprise-grade hardware a challenge. so i'm hoping someone can 
>> recommend a known-working configuration that would allow a windows server 
>> kvm running sybase database to perform decently on smartos. the less 
>> expensive the better, of course.
>> 
>> and if your recommendation is to skip smartos and go with a bare metal 
>> install, i'd like to hear that as well. it's not what i want to end up with, 
>> but that doesn't mean it's not the right answer. not everything works well 
>> virtualized, and with the kvm serial-disk-access issue i've read about i 
>> realize that might be the case here.
>> 
>> thanks for your insight.
>> 
>> -dewey
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------
smartos-discuss
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769125&id_secret=25769125-7688e9fb
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to