[THIN] Re: Citrix - Harddisk Specification - Email found in subject
- From: <Jacob.Maurer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:05:24 +0000
There are some performance technologies around now which can "Prioritise" or
"Schedule" the User\Process access to the disk subsystem of a Windows Server
(virtual guest or physical). This can achieve real benefits for SAN type
deployments, or simply, to overcome the kind of bottle neck and latency issues
Matt mentions below.
So, given the scenario below, I could setup a group of apps\process\users who I
knew didn't have heavy disk paging activity and bump their priority to the
disk. If this app\process\user comes into competition with another process that
needs disk system access, my filter driver pauses it for a second so my app
experiences a greatly reduced disk latency time (if at all, if not enhanced
access times in any given moment)
While you're at it this kind of performance software technology will reduce the
amount of paging by optimising .DLL resources and free up physical memory. Net
result? Greater user densities (typically 40%) or Less Physical Servers (less
tin, power, CO2 and all that), or less $$$ spent trying to add sufficient
bandwidth to a SAN. Pays for itself in the end.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Matt Kosht
Sent: Saturday, 20 December 2008 7:28 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [SPAM] - [THIN] Re: Citrix - Harddisk Specification - Email found in
subject
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Joe Shonk <joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ok... So it's fair to say that the Dell RAID Controllers have progressed
> since the NT 4.0 days? If you end up losing the RAID set who cares? It's a
> terminal server. If Fault Tolerance isn't an issue, then I would argue that
> RAID 0 will give you better performance over two independent spindles.
I would disagree. If your disk arms (both of them are predominantly
hitting the page file) you have created latency for other non-paging
disk activities. System may page faster but apps and other binaries
are waiting for disk time due to waiting on near constant paging
activity. It' probably hair splitting at this point dedicated spindle
for paging vs. just RAID0 but this config works well for me.
>
> It's not the form factor that causing the drives to fail, but the excessive
> heat generated by blades/chassis. Not to mention vibrations.
>
> Performance Hit with SAN? Yes, this thread has been through this argument.
> With the right system, it's even faster. 15k SAS drives are great, except
> when you factor in the crappy SAS controllers.
>
> SSD give great performance on reads, but not much of an advantage on writes.
> It all depends on your workloads.
>
> As far as virtualization goes... Sure there is overhead. But can a single
> 32-bit Terminal server take advantage of a quad-core processor? Or more
> likely 8-cores in box? At the moment, the hardware has outpaced the
> operating system. Even with x64 system, how many users do you really want
> to pack on single OS instance?
Correct. I am actually talking (4) 32 bit TS/XE servers on 1 physical
blade (using a bare metal hypervisor like Hyper-V) as it will be able
to actually use all of that horsepower. x64 breaks some of our apps,
so for now it's out of the picture. If you have the resources why not
use it?
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************
AppSense provides user environment management solutions that personalize and
optimize virtual and physical user
environments. Whether delivered via Citrix, Terminal Server, Virtual Desktops,
Streaming, Blade PCs or physical
desktops, AppSense solutions ensure consistent, contextual and responsive
environments to all users all the time.
Find out more by visiting us at www.appsense.com.
CONFIDENTIAL: The contents of this email and any attachments may be
confidential. It is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do
not disclose the contents to any other person or make
any copies. AppSense monitors communications. AppSense Limited is Registered in
the United Kingdom, Registration Number 3873980.
Registered Address: 3200 Daresbury Park, Daresbury, Warrington, Cheshire,
United Kingdom, WA4 4BU
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************
Other related posts:
- » [THIN] Re: Citrix - Harddisk Specification - Email found in subject - Jacob.Maurer
