Tuesday Sep 10, 2013

ZS3 is #1 on Storage Performance Council benchmark site

This is pretty cool. It seems the ZS3-4 just became the number 1 system in performance on Storage Performance Council's benchmark site.

The email below went out today to all SPC members. 

I would like to point out that we are also the LEAST EXPENSIVE system per SPC-2 performance. Check out our Price/Performance numbers.
So we came in at 17,244 for a $388,472 system, for a price/performance of $22.53.
Now compare that to the 2nd place system on the site, which is HP's P9500. It came in at  13,147 for a huge price of $1,161,503 and a price/performance of $88.34

We KILLED it....

SPC Members:
Oracle Corporation has submitted the SPC-2 Result™ listed below.
The Executive Summary and Full Disclosure Report (FDR) are posted in the Benchmark Results section of the website.
The documents may be accessed by using the URL listed below:

Oracle ZFS Storage ZS3-4 (2-node cluster):

   SPC-2 Submission Identifier .... B00067
SPC-2 MBPS™ …………………….... 17,244.22
   SPC-2 Price-Performance™ …… $22.53/SPC-2 MBPS™
   Total ASU Capacity ………….…..  31,610.959 GB
   Data Protection Level ………..…. Protected 2 (Mirroring)
   Total Price ………………………….... $388,472.03

Congratulations to Oracle for an outstanding SPC-2 Result, which established a new #1 for SPC-2 performance (17,244.22 SPC-2 MBPS™).
SPC Administrator
Storage Performance Council (SPC) 

Saturday Apr 14, 2012

New SPC2 benchmark- The 7420 KILLS it !!!

This is pretty sweet. The new SPC2 benchmark came out last week, and the 7420 not only came in 2nd of ALL speed scores, but came in #1 for price per MBPS.

Check out this table. The 7420 score of 10,704 makes it really fast, but that's not the best part. The price one would have to pay in order to beat it is ridiculous. You can go see for yourself at http://www.storageperformance.org/results/benchmark_results_spc2
The only system on the whole page that beats it was over twice the price per MBPS. Very sweet for Oracle.

So let's see, the 7420 is the fastest per $.
The 7420 is the cheapest per MBPS.
The 7420 has incredible, built-in features, management services, analytics, and protocols. It's extremely stable and as a cluster has no single point of failure. It won the Storage Magazine award for best NAS system this year.

So how long will it be before it's the number 1 NAS system in the market? What are the biggest hurdles still stopping the widespread adoption of the ZFSSA? From what I see, it's three things: 1. Administrator's comfort level with older legacy systems. 2. Politics 3. Past issues with Oracle Support.  

I see all of these issues crop up regularly. Number 1 just takes time and education. Number 3 takes time with our new, better, and growing support team. many of them came from Oracle and there were growing pains when they went from a straight software-model to having to also support hardware. Number 2 is tricky, but it's the job of the sales teams to break through the internal politics and help their clients see the value in oracle hardware systems. Benchmarks like this will help.

Thursday Feb 23, 2012

Great new 7320 benchmark

A great new benchmark has been put up on SPEC for our mid-class 7320. You can see it here:


What's cool about this benchmark is the fact this is not only our middle-sized box, but it used only 136 drives to reach this rather high 134,140 NFS Ops/sec number. If you look at the other systems tested here, you will notice that they must use MANY more drives (at presumably a much higher cost) in order to meet or beat those IOPS.

Check these out here... http://www.spec.org/sfs2008/results/sfs2008nfs.html

For example, a FAS6080 should be far faster then our smaller 7320, right? But it only scored 120,011 even though it used 324 disks. The Isilon S200 with 14 nodes and 679 drives only scored 115,911. I would hate to find out what that system's street price is. I'm pretty sure it's higher then our 7320 with 136 drives. Now, of course all of these benchmark numbers are unrealistic to most people, as they are done in perfect conditions with each manufacture's engineers tuning and tweaking the system the best they can, right? True, but if that's the case, and the other folks tuned and configured those other boxes just like we did, it still seems like a fair fight to me, and our results are just heads and tails above the rest on a cost per IOP basis. I don't see anything on this site that touches our IOPS with the same amount of drives and presumably the same cost price range. Please point out if I missed anything here, I might be wrong.

I really love the ones that go so far overboard on this site... Check out the 140 node Isilon. Let's see... Wow, it's over one million IOPS!!!! That's impressive, until you see it's using 3,360 disk drives. That's funny. PLEASE let me know if you have a 140 node Isilon up and running. I'd love to see it. I'd also love to know what it costs.


This blog is a way for Steve to send out his tips, ideas, links, and general sarcasm. Almost all related to the Oracle 7000, code named ZFSSA, or Amber Road, or Open Storage, or Unified Storage. You are welcome to contact Steve.Tunstall@Oracle.com with any comments or questions


« April 2014