Tuesday Nov 10, 2009

PeopleSoft North American Payroll on Sun Solaris with F5100 Flash Array : A blog Reprise

During the "Sun day" keynote at OOW 09, John Fowler stated that we are #1 in PeopleSoft North American Payroll performance. Later Vince Carbone from our Performance Technologies group went on comparing our benchmark numbers with HP's and IBM's in BestPerf's group blog at Oracle PeopleSoft Payroll (NA) Sun SPARC Enterprise M4000 and Sun Storage F5100 World Record Performance. Meanwhile Jeorg Moellenkamp had been clarifying few things in his blog at App benchmarks, incorrect conclusions and the Sun Storage F5100. Interestingly it all happened while we have no concrete evidence in our hands to show to the outside world. We got our benchmark results validated right before the Oracle OpenWorld, which gave us the ability to speak about it publicly [ and we used it to the extent we could use ]. However Oracle folks were busy with their scheduled tasks for OOW 09 and couldn't work on the benchmark results white paper until now. Finally the white paper with the NA Payroll benchmark results is available on Oracle Applications benchmark web site. Here is the URL:

        PeopleSoft Enterprise Payroll 9.0 using Oracle for Solaris on a Sun SPARC Enterprise M4000

Once again the summary of results is shown below but in a slightly different format. These numbers were extracted from the very first page of the benchmark results white papers where PeopleSoft usually highlights the significance of the results and the actual numbers that they are interested in. The results are sorted by the hourly throughput (payments/hour) in the descending order. The goal is to achieve as much hourly throughput as possible. Since there is one 16 stream result as well in the following table, exercise caution when comparing 8 stream results with 16 stream results. In general, 16 parallel job streams are supposed to yield better throughput when compared to 8 parallel job streams. Hence comparing a 16 stream number with an 8 stream number is not an exact apple-to-apple comparison. It is more like comparing an apple to another apple that is half in size. Click on the link that is underneath the hourly throughput values to open corresponding benchmark result.

Oracle PeopleSoft North American Payroll 9.0 - Number of employees: 240,000 & Number of payments: 360,000
Vendor OS Hardware Config #Job Streams Elapsed Time (min) Hourly Throughput
Payments per Hour
Sun Solaris 10 5/09 1x Sun SPARC Enterprise M4000 with 4 x 2.53 GHz SPARC64-VII Quad-Core processors and 32 GB memory
1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array with 40 Flash Modules for data, indexes
1 x Sun Storage J4200 Array for redo logs
8 67.85 318,349
HP HP-UX 1 x HP Integrity rx6600 with 4 x 1.6 GHz Intel Itanium2 9000 Dual-Core processors and 32 GB memory
1 x HP StorageWorks EVA 8100
16 68.07 317,320
HP HP-UX 1 x HP Integrity rx6600 with 4 x 1.6 GHz Intel Itanium2 9000 Dual-Core processors and 32 GB memory
1 x HP StorageWorks EVA 8100
8 89.77 240,615\*
IBM z/OS 1 x IBM zSeries 990 model 2084-B16 with 313 Feature with 6 x IBM z990 Gen1 processors (populated: 13, used: 6) and 32 GB memory
1 x IBM TotalStorage DS8300 with dual 4-way processors
8 91.7 235,551

This is all public information -- so, feel free to draw your own conclusions. \*At this time of writing, HP's 8 stream results were pulled out of Oracle Applications benchmark web site for some reason I do not know why. Hopefully it will show up again on the same web site soon. If it doesn't re-appear even after a month, probably we can simply assume that the result is withdrawn.

As these benchmark results were already discussed by different people in different blogs, I have nothing much to add. The only thing that I want to highlight is that this particular workload is moderately CPU intensive, but very I/O bound. Hence the better the I/O sub-system, the better the performance. Vince provided an insight on Why Sun Storage F5100 is a good option for this workload, while Jignesh Shah from our ISV-Engineering organization focused on the performance of this benchmark workload with F20 PCIe Card.

Also when dealing with NA Payroll, it is very unlikely to achieve a nice out-of-the-box performance. It requires a lot of database tuning too. As the data sets are very large, we partitioned the data in some of the very hot objects and it showed good improvement in query response times. So if you are a PeopleSoft customer running Payroll application with millions of rows of non-partitioned data, consider partitioning the data. [Updated 11/30/09]We are currently working on a best practices blueprint document for PeopleSoft North American Payroll that presents a variety of tuning tips like these in addition to the recommended practices for F5100 flash array and flash accelerator F20 PCIe card. Stay tuned .. Sun published a best practices blueprint document with a variety of tuning tips like these in addition to the recommended practices for F5100 flash array and flash accelerator F20 PCIe card. You can download the blueprint from the following location:

    Best Practices for Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise Payroll for North America using the Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array or Sun Flash Accelerator F20 PCIe Card

Related Blog Post:

Friday Oct 09, 2009

Sun achieves the Magic Number 50,000 on T5440 with Oracle Business Intelligence EE 10.1.3.4

Less than two months ago, Sun Microsystems published an Oracle Business Intelligence benchmark with the best single system performance of 28,000 concurrent BI EE users at ~75% CPU utilization. Sun and Oracle Corporation announced another Oracle Business Intelligence benchmark result today with two identical T5440 servers in the Oracle BI Cluster serving 50,000 concurrent BI EE users.

An Oracle white paper with Sun's 50,000 user benchmark results can be accessed from Oracle's Business Intelligence web.

The hardware specifications for each of the T5440s are similar to the hardware that was used in the prior benchmark effort on a single T5440 server. However this time the Presentation Catalog (also frequently referred as the Web Catalog) was moved to a T5220 server where the NFS server was running. Besides this the only other change from the earlier 28,000 user benchmark exercise is the addition of another T5440 to the test rig.

The following graph shows the scalability of the application from one node to four nodes to eight nodes running on T5440 servers.

OBIEE on T5440 : Scalability Graph

Without further ado, here is the summary of the benchmark results along with their significance and some interesting facts:

  • One of the major goals of this benchmark effort is to show the horizontal and vertical scalability of the application (OBIEE) by highlighting the superior performance and the resilience of the underlying hardware (T5440) and the operating system (Solaris). Needless to say the goal has been met.

  • Another goal of this benchmark is to show decent number of concurrent BI EE users executing transactions with good response times. Since we already showed the maximum load that can be achieved on a single BI instance (7500 users) and on a single T5440 server running multiple BI instances (28,000 users), this time we did not attempt to get the peak number that can be achieved from the two T5440 servers in the benchmark environment. Now that there is an additional server in the test setup that is taking care of the Presentation Catalog and the database server, 2 \* 28000 = 56,000 BI EE users would have been an achievable target -- but we opted to stop at the "magic" and the "respectable" number 50,000 instead.

  • The entire benchmark run lasted for about 9 hours 45 minutes, and out of which 8 hours were the rampup hours where the 50,000 BI virtual users were logging into the application few users at a time. LoadRunner tool reported only 4 errors for the entire duration of the run; and there are zero errors in the 60 minute steady state period during which the statistics reported in the document were collected.

  • Two Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 servers each with 4 x 8-Core 1.6 GHz UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors delivered the best performance of 50,000 concurrent BI EE users at around 63% CPU utilization.

  • The BI EE Cluster was deployed on two T5440 servers running Solaris 10 5/09 operating system. All the nodes in the BI Cluster were consolidated onto two T5440 servers using the free and efficient Solaris Containers virtualization technology.

  • The Presentation Catalog was hosted on ZFS powered file system that was created on top of four internal Solid State Drive (SSD) disks. The Catalog was shared among all eight BI nodes in the cluster as an NFS share. One 8-Core 1.2 GHz UltraSPARC T2 processor powered T5220 server was used to run the NFS server. Due to the minimal activity of the database, Oracle 11g database was also hosted on the same server. Solaris 10 5/09 is the operating system.

  • Solid State Drive (SSD) disks with ZFS file system showed significant I/O performance improvement over traditional disks for the Presentation Catalog activity. In addition, ZFS helped get past the UFS limitation of 32767 sub-directories in a Presentation Catalog directory.

  • Caching was turned ON at the application server, which led to minimal database activity on the server. Note hat the caching mechanism was turned ON even in the prior benchmark exercise.

  • The low end CoolThreads CMT Server T5220 and the mid-range T5440 server once again proved to be ideal candidates to deploy and run multi-thread workloads by exhibiting resilient performance when handling large number of simultaneous requests from 50,000 BI EE virtual users. T5220 handled large number of concurrent asynchronous read/write requests from eight different NFS clients.

  • NFS v3 was configured at the NFS Server as well as at the NFS Client nodes. NFS version 4 is the default on Solaris 10, and it might have worked as expected. However a handful of bug reports prompted us to go with the more matured and less buggy version 3.

  • 3283 watts is the average power consumption when all the 50,000 concurrent BI users are in the steady state of the benchmark test. That is, in the case of similarly configured workloads, the T5440 server supports 15.2 users per watt of energy consumed and supports 5,000 users per rack unit.

  • A summary of the results with system-wide averages of CPU and memory utilization is shown below. The latest results are highlighted in blue color.

    #Vusers Clustered #BI Nodes #CPU #Core RAM CPU Memory Avg Trx Response Time #Trx/sec
    7,500 No 1 1 8 32 GB 72.85% 18.11 GB 0.22 sec 155
    28,000 Yes 4 4 32 128 GB 75.04% 76.16 GB 0.25 sec 580
    50,000 Yes 8 8 64 256 GB 63.32% 172.21 GB 0.28 sec 1031

TOPOLOGY DIAGRAM

The topology diagram in the benchmark results white paper is almost illegible. Here is the original topology diagram that was inserted into the white paper.

OBIEE on T5440 : 50K User Benchmark Topology

Quite frankly I'm not very proud of this drawing -- but that's the best that I could come up with in a short span. Rather than showing the flow of communication between each and every component in the benchmark setup, I simplified the drawing by introducing a "black box" sort of thing - "private network" - in the middle, which protected the drawing from getting messy.


CPU USAGE GRAPH

The following two-dimensional graph shows the CPU utilization patterns at all 3 nodes in the benchmark setup for the 60 minute steady state of the benchmark run. This graph was generated using the free GNUplot tool with sar data as the inputs.

OBIEE on T5440 : 50K User Benchmark CPU Usage Graph

COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE

And finally here is a quick summary of all the results that are published by different vendors so far with similar benchmark kit. Feel free to draw your own conclusions. All this is public information. Check the corresponding benchmark reports by clicking on the URLs under the "#Users" column.

Server Processors #Users OS
Chips Cores Threads GHz Type
  2 x Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 (APP)
  1 x Sun SPARC Enterprise T5220 (NFS,DB)
8
1
64
8
512
64
1.6
1.2
UltraSPARC T2 Plus
UltraSPARC T2
50,000 Solaris 10 5/09
  1 x Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 4 32 256 1.6 UltraSPARC T2 Plus 28,000 Solaris 10 5/09
  5 x Sun Fire T2000 1 8 32 1.2 UltraSPARC T1 10,000 Solaris 10 11/06
  3 x HP DL380 G4 2 4 4 2.8 Intel Xeon 5,800 OEL
  1 x IBM x3755 4 8 8 2.8 AMD Opteron 4,000 RHEL4


Before you go, do not forget to check the best practices for configuring / deploying Oracle Business Intelligence on top of Solaris 10 running on Sun CMT hardware.

Related Blog Posts:
T5440 Rocks [again] with Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition Workload

Monday Aug 17, 2009

T5440 Rocks [again] with Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition Workload

A while ago, I blogged about how we scaled Siebel 8.0 up to 14,000 concurrent users by consolidating the entire Siebel stack on a single Sun SPARC® Enterprise T5440 server with 4 x 1.4 GHz eight-core UltraSPARC® T2 Plus Processors. OLTP workload was used in that performance benchmark effort.

We repeated a similar effort by collaborating with Oracle Corporation, but with an OLAP workload this time around. Today Sun and Oracle announced the 28,000 user Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) 10.1.3.4 benchmark results on a single Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 server with 4 x 1.6 GHz eight-core UltraSPARC T2 Plus Processors running Solaris 10 5/09 operating system. An Oracle white paper with Sun's 28,000 user benchmark results is available on Oracle's benchmark web site.

Some of the notes and key take away's from this benchmark are as follows:

  • Key specifications for the Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 system under test are: 4 x UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors, 32 cores, 256 compute threads and 128 GB of memory in a 4RU space.

  • The entire OBIEE solution was deployed on a single Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 server using Oracle BI Cluster software.

  • The BI Cluster was configured with 4 x BI nodes. Each of those BI nodes were configured to run inside a Solaris Container.

    1. Each Solaris Container was configured with one physical processor (that is, 8 cores or 64 virtual cpus), and 32 GB physical memory.

    2. Each BI node was configured to run BI Server, Presentation Server and OC4J Web Server

    3. Two of the BI nodes have the BI Cluster Controller running (primary & secondary)

    4. One out of four Containers was sharing CPU and memory resources with Oracle 11g RDBMS and the host operating system that are running in the global zone

  • Caching was turned ON at the application server, which led to minimal database activity on the server.

    1. In other words, one can use these results only to size the hardware requirements for a complete BI EE deployment excluding the database server.

    2. All the OBIEE benchmark results published so far are with the caching turned ON. This fact was not explicitly mentioned in some of the benchmark results white papers. Check the competitive Landscape for the pointers to different benchmark results published by different vendors.

  • From our experiments with the OBIEE benchmark workload, it appears that a BI deployment with a single non-cluster BI node could reasonably scale well up to 7,500 active users on a T5440 server. To scale beyond 7,500 concurrent users, you might need another instance of BI. Of course, your mileage may vary.

  • BI EE exhibited excellent horizontal scalability when multiple BI nodes were clustered using BI Cluster software. Four BI nodes in the Cluster were able to handle 28,000 concurrent users with minimal impact on the overall average transaction response times.

      It appeared as though we can simply add more BI nodes to the BI Cluster to cope with the increase in user base. However due to the limited hardware resources, we could not try running beyond 4 nodes in the BI Cluster. As of today, the theoritical limit for the number of BI nodes in a Cluster is 16.

  • The underlying hardware must behave well in order for the application to scale and perform well -- so, credit goes to UltraSPARC T2 Plus powered Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 server as well. In other words, it is fair to say the combination of (T5440 + OBIEE) performs and scales well on Solaris.

  • A summary of the results with system-wide averages of CPU and memory utilization is shown below.

    #Vusers Clustered #BI Nodes #CPU #Core RAM CPU Memory Avg Trx Response Time #Trx/sec
    7,500 No 1 1 8 32 GB 72.85% 18.11 GB 0.22 sec 155
    28,000 Yes 4 4 32 128 GB 75.04% 76.16 GB 0.25 sec 580
  • Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) with ZFS file system showed significant I/O performance improvement over traditional disk for the BI catalog activity. In addition, ZFS helped get past the UFS limitation of 32,767 sub-directories in a BI catalog directory.

  • The benchmark demonstrated that 64-bit BI EE platform is immune to the 4 GB virtual memory limitation of the 32-bit BI EE platform -- hence can potentially support even more users and have larger caches as long as the hardware resources are available.

      Solaris runs in 64-bit mode by default on SPARC platform. Consider running 64-bit BI EE on Solaris.

  • 2,107 watts is the average power consumption when all the 28,000 concurrent users are in the steady state of the benchmark test. That is, in the case of similarly configured workloads, T5440 supports 13.2 users per watt of the power consumed; and supports 7,000 users per rack unit.

TOPOLOGY DIAGRAM:

A picture is worth a thousand words. The following topology diagram(s) says it all about the configuration.

1. Single Node BI Non-Cluster Configuration : 7,500 Concurrent Users

Even though the Solaris Container was shown in a cloud like graphical form, it has nothing to do with the "Cloud Computing". It is just a side effect of fancy drawing.

2. Four Node BI Cluster Configuration : 28,000 Concurrent Users

COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE

Here is a quick summary of all the results that are published by different vendors. Feel free to draw your own conclusions. All this is public information. Check the corresponding benchmark reports by clicking on the URLs under the "#Users" column.

Server Processors #Users OS
Chips Cores Threads GHz Type
  1 x Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 4 32 256 1.6 UltraSPARC T2 Plus 28,000 Solaris 10 5/09
  5 x Sun Fire T2000 1 8 32 1.2 UltraSPARC T1 10,000 Solaris 10 11/06
  3 x HP DL380 G4 2 4 4 2.8 Intel Xeon 5,800 OEL
  1 x IBM x3755 4 8 8 2.8 AMD Opteron 4,000 RHEL4

CAUTION

Although T5440 possesses a ton of great qualities, it might not be suitable for deploying workloads with heavy single-threaded dependencies. The T5440 is an excellent hardware platform for multi-threaded, and moderately single-threaded/multi-process workloads. When in doubt, it is a good idea to leverage Sun Microsystems' Try & Buy program to try the workloads on the T5440 server before making the final call.


Check the second part of this blog post for the best practices for configuring / deploying Oracle Business Intelligence on top of Solaris 10 running on Sun CMT hardware.

Related Blog Posts:

Tuesday Feb 17, 2009

PeopleSoft HRMS 8.9 Self-Service Benchmark on M3000 & T5120 Servers

Sun published the PeopleSoft HRMS 8.9 Self-Service benchmark results today. The benchmark was conducted on 3 x Sun SPARC Enterprise M3000 and 1 x Sun SPARC Enterprise T5120 servers. Click on the following link for the full report with the benchmark results.

PeopleSoft HRMS 8.9 SELF-SERVICE Using ORACLE on Sun SPARC Enterprise M3000 and Enterprise T5120 Servers

Admittedly it is Sun's first PeopleSoft benchmark after a hiatus of over five years. However I am glad that we came up with a very nice cost effective solution in our comeback effort to the PeopleSoft applications' benchmarking.

Some of the notes and highlights from this competitive benchmark are as follows.

  • The benchmark measured the average search and save transaction response times at a peak load of 4,000 concurrent users.

  • 4,000 users is the limitation of the benchmark kit. All vendors using this benchmark kit are bound to this limitation . Hence it is easy to compare the performance as the throughput achieved by each vendor will be the same. In comparing the benchmark results from workloads like these, lower average [transaction response times, CPU, memory utilizations] and the hardware in use (lesser the better), usually indicate better performance.

  • IBM and Sun are the only vendors who published benchmark results with PeopleSoft HRMS 8.9 Self-Service benchmark kit.

  • Sun's benchmark results are superior relative to IBM's best published result on a combination of z990 2084-C24 and eServer pSeries p690 servers. While I leave the price comparisons to the reader1, I'd like to show the performance numbers extracted from the benchmark reports published by Sun and IBM. All the following data/information is available in the benchmark reports. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

    Average Transaction Response Times

    Vendor Single User
    Search (sec)
    4,000 Users
    Search (sec)
    Single User
    Save (sec)
    4,000 Users
    Save (sec)
    Sun 0.78 0.77 0.71 0.74
    IBM 0.78 1.35 0.65 1.01

    Average CPU Utilizations

    Vendor Web Server
    CPU%
    App Server1
    CPU%
    App Server2
    CPU%
    DB Server
    CPU%
    Sun 23.10 66.92 67.85 27.45
    IBM 45.81 59.70 N/A 40.66

    Average Memory Utilizations

    Vendor Web Server
    GB
    App Server1
    GB
    App Server2
    GB
    DB Server
    GB
    Sun 4.15 3.67 3.72 5.54
    IBM 5.00 15.70 N/A 0.3 (Huh!?)

    Hardware Configuration

    Vendor: Sun Microsystems

    Topology Diagram

    topology



    Tier Server
    Model
    Server
    Count
    Processor Processor
    Speed
    Processor
    Count
    #Cores per
    Processor
    Memory
    Web T5120 1 UltraSPARC-T2 1.2 GHz 1 4 8 GB
    App M3000 2 SPARC64-VII 2.52 GHz 1 4 8 GB
    DB M3000 1 SPARC64-VII 2.52 GHz 1 4 8 GB

    2 x Sun Storage J4200 arrays were used to host the database. Total disk space: ~1.34 Terabytes. Consumed only 120 GB disk space -- 115 GB for data on one array; and 5 GB for redo logs on the other array.


    Vendor: IBM

    Tier Server
    Model
    Server
    Count
    Processor Processor
    Speed
    Processor
    Count
    #Cores per
    Processor
    Memory
    Web p690 (7040-681) 1 POWER4 1.9 GHz 4 NA (?) 12 GB
    App p690 (7040-681) 1 POWER4 1.9 GHz 12 NA (?) 32 GB
    DB zSeries 990, model 2084-C24 1 z990 Gen1 ??? 6 NA (?) 32 GB

    1 x IBM TotalStorage DS8300 Enterprise Storage Server, 2107-922 ws used to host the database. Total disk space: ~9 Terabytes.

  • The combination of Sun SPARC Enterprise M3000 and T5120 servers consumed 1030 Watts on the average in a 7RU space in achieving 4,000 concurrent users. That is, in the case of similarly configured workloads, M3000/T5120 support 3.88 users per watt of the power consumed; and 571 users per rack unit.

Just like our prior Siebel and Oracle E-Business Suite Payroll 11i benchmarks, Sun collaborated with Oracle Corporation in executing this benchmark. And we sincerely thank our peers at Oracle Corporation for all their help and support over the past few months in executing this benchmark.

___________

I'm planning to post some of the tuning tips to run PeopleSoft optimally on Solaris 10. Stay tuned ..

1: It is relatively hard to obtain IBM's server list prices. On the other hand, it is very easy to find the list prices of Sun servers' from http://store.sun.com

Saturday Nov 15, 2008

Yet Another Siebel 8.0 PSPP Benchmark on Sun CMT Hardware ..

.. Sun SPARC Enterprise T5240.

(This blog entry also serves as a summary page for all the Siebel 8.0 benchmarks that Sun published so far.)

Yesterday Sun published a brand new 10,000 user Siebel 8.0 benchmark result using a combination of T5240 and T5120 servers. In this benchmark, a Sun SPARC Enterprise T5240 server equipped with two 1.2 GHz, 8-Core UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors served as the system under test on which we ran the Siebel Gateway and Enterprise application servers. Two Sun SPARC Enterprise T5120 servers equipped with one 1.2 GHz, 8-Core UltraSPARC T2 processor were configured to run the Oracle database and the Sun Java System Web servers.

A copy of the latest benchmark publication is available on Oracle Applications' benchmark web site at:
        Siebel CRM Release 8.0 Industry Applications and Oracle 10g R2 DB on Sun SPARC Enterprise T5120 & T5240 servers running Solaris 10

For some reason, the topology diagram in the benchmark publication document was messed up esp. the fonts -- probably the odt -> doc -> pdf conversion. The clean copy of the diagram is shown below.

Significance of the Siebel 8.0 on T5240 benchmark

In case if anyone wonder why do we need another Siebel 8.0 benchmark on CMT hardware esp. when we already published couple of Siebel 8.0 benchmarks on T5220 and T5440 systems -- 10,000 users on T5120/T5220 and 14,000 users on T5440, the answer is simple: to show linear scalability.

In the first benchmark that Sun published in January 2008, we showed the scalability of the application, Siebel, on T5220 systems. We were able to scale up to 5,000 concurrent users on a single T5220 system (running the Siebel application servers) with 1.2 GHz, 8-Core US-T2 processor. We've used two such systems to publish the 10,000 user benchmark in the first installment.

The goal of the second benchmark that we published in October 2008 during the T5440 server launch showcases how to consolidate multiple workloads on a T5440 server. We demonstrated it by deploying the whole Siebel Enterprise -- Sun Java System Web Server along with the Siebel Web Server plug-in Siebel Web Engine (SWE), Siebel Gateway Server, Siebel Application Server and the Oracle Database Server -- on a single Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 server equipped with four 1.4 GHz, 8-Core UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors. We ran 14,000 concurrent virtual users against this setup to make it a benchmark publication. Since we ran all tiers of Siebel Enterprise on the same box, it is hard to compare the scalability numbers from this benchmark against the numbers that we published in the 10,000 user benchmark on T5120/T5220 servers.

In April 2008, Sun has launched the first multi-processor CMT system, Sun SPARC Enterprise T5240. T5240 holds two UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors, and is supposed to exhibit 2x performance[1] as that of a T5220. In other words, two T5220 servers can be consolidated onto a single T5240. To prove this, we re-ran the 10,000 user benchmark that we published back in January 2008 by replacing the two T5220 servers in the application tier with a T5240 server, and keeping the remaining hardware configuration for the web and database servers intact. The results from this benchmark speak for themselves - but for your convenience here is the quick summary of the results.



#users #units x Server Model Business Transactions
Throughput/hour
Projected
Daily
Transactions
Benchmark Publication
URL & Date
10,000 2 x T5220 142,061 1,136,488 10K/T5220, 01/2008
10,000 1 x T5240 141,205 1,129,640 10K/T5240, 11/2008


If you are a Sun-Oracle customer, make sure to check the Siebel on Sun CMT hardware : Best Practices web page for some useful tips.

Related entries:

  1. Siebel 8.0 on Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 - More Bang for the Buck!!
  2. Sun publishes 10,000 user Siebel 8.0 PSPP benchmark on Niagara 2 systems
  3. Siebel CRM 8.0 PSPP UltraSPARC T2 beats POWER6 and sets World Record


[1] There is no unique definition for the word 'performance' -- it has different meanings based on the context.

Monday Oct 13, 2008

Siebel 8.0 on Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 - More Bang for the Buck!!

Today Sun announced the 14,000 user Siebel 8.0 PSPP benchmark results on a single Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440. An Oracle white paper with Sun's 14,000 user benchmark results is available on Oracle's Siebel benchmark web site. The content in this blog post complements the benchmark white paper.

Some of the notes and highlights from this competitive benchmark are as follows:

  • Key specifications for the Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 system under test, are: 4 x UltraSPARC T2 Plus processors, 32 cores, 256 compute threads and 128 GB of memory in a 4RU space.

  • The entire Siebel 8.0 solution was deployed on a single Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 including the web, gateway, application, and database servers.

      9 load driver clients with dual-core Opteron and Xeon processors were used to load up 14,000 concurrent users

  • Web, Application and the Database servers were isolated from each other by creating three Solaris Containers (non-global zones or local zones) dedicated one each for all those servers.

      Solaris 10 Binary Application Guarantee Program guarantees the binary compatibility for all applications running under Solaris native host operating system environments as well as Solaris 10 OS running as a guest operating system in a virtualized platform environment.

  • Siebel Gateway server and the Siebel Application servers were installed and configured in one of the three Solaris Containers. Two identical copies of Siebel Application server instances were configured to handle 7,000 user load by each of those instances.

      From our experiments with the Siebel 8.0 benchmark workload, it appears that a single instance of Siebel Application server could scale up to 10,000 active users. Siebel Connection Broker (SCBroker) component becomes the bottleneck at the peak load in a single instance of the Siebel Application server.

  • To keep it simple, the benchmark publication white paper limits itself to an overview of the system configuration. The full details are available in the diagram below.

    Topology Diagram



    The breakdown of the approximate averages of CPU and memory utilization by each tier is shown below.

    TierCPUMemory
    Web78%4.50 GB
    App76%69.00 GB
    DB72%20.00 GB

    System-wide averages are as follows:

    TierCPUMemory
    Web + App + DB82%93.5 GB


  • 1276 watts is the average power consumption when all the 14,000 concurrent users are in the steady state of the benchmark test. That is, in the case of similarly configured workloads, T5440 supports 10.97 users per watt of the power consumed; and supports 3500 users per rack unit.

Based on the above notes: Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 is inexpensive, requires: less power and data center footprint, ideal for consolidation and equally importantly scales well.



Vendor-to-Vendor comparison

How does our new 14,000 user benchmark result compare with the high watermark benchmark results published by other vendors using the same Siebel 8.0 PSPP workload?

Besides Sun, IBM and HP are the only other vendors who published benchmark results so far with the Siebel 8.0 PSPP benchmark workload. IBM's highest user count is 7,000; where as 5,200 is HP's. Here is a quick comparison of the throughputs based on the results published by Sun, IBM and HP with the highest number of active users.

Sun Microsystems' 14,000 user benchmark on a single T5440 outperformed:

  • IBM's 7,000 user benchmark result by 1.9x

  • HP's 5,200 user benchmark result by 2.5x
      HP published the 5,200 user result with a combination of 2 x BL460c running Windows Server 2003 and 1 x rx6600 HP system running HP-UX.

  • Sun's own 10,000 user benchmark result on a combination of 2 x T5120 and 2 x T5220s by 1.4x

From the operating system perspective, Solaris outperformed AIX, Windows Server 2003 and HP-UX. Linux is nowhere to be found in the competitive landscape.

A simple comparison of all the published Siebel 8.0 benchmark results (as of today) by all vendors justifies the title of this blog post. As IBM and HP do not post the list price of all of their servers, I am not even attempting to show the price/performance comparison in here. On the other hand, Sun openly lists out all the list prices at store.sun.com web site.

CAUTION

Although T5440 possesses a ton of great qualities, it might not be suitable for deploying workloads with heavy single-threaded dependencies. The T5440 is an excellent hardware platform for multi-threaded, and moderately single-threaded/multi-process workloads. When in doubt, it is a good idea to leverage Sun Microsystems' Try & Buy program to try the workloads on this new and shiny T5440 before making the final call.



I would like to share the tuning information from the OS and the underlying hardware perspective for couple of reasons -- 1. Oracle's benchmark white paper does not include any of the system specific tuning information, and 2. it may take quite a bit of time for Oracle Corporation to update the Siebel Tuning Guide for Solaris with some of the tuning information that you find in here.

Check the second part of this blog post for the best practices running Siebel on Sun CMT hardware.

Friday Jan 04, 2008

Sun publishes 10,000 user Siebel 8.0 PSPP benchmark on Niagara 2 systems

Here is the link to the benchmark white paper publication:

Siebel CRM Release 8.0 Industry Applications and Oracle 10gR2 DB on Sun SPARC Enterprise T5120/T5220 servers running the Solaris 10 OS

Some key highlights from the white paper:


  • All tiers of the Siebel CRM Release 8.0 architecture ran on chip multithreading (CMT) processor, UltraSPARC T2 based T5120/T5220 systems running Solaris 10 8/07.
  • Multithreading capability of the US T2 processor allowed each of the active Object Manager (OM) processes to run hundreds of Light Weight Processes (LWP), thus utilizing the available resources very effectively. A total number of 30 object managers serviced the work load of 10,000 concurrent users.
  • While supporting 10,000 concurrent Siebel users, the entire Sun Solution based on Sun SPARC Enterprise T5120/T5220 servers running Siebel CRM Release 8.0 and Oracle 10g R2 on top of Solaris 10 consumed 1202 watts in a 6U rack space. As a result the T5210/T5220 supports 8.3 users per watt of energy consumed and supports 1666 users per rack unit.
  • Apparently this is the best Siebel 8.0 benchmark result out there in terms of the number of users and price/performance. Feel free to compare Sun's 10,000 user result with other published results that you may find at Oracle Siebel Benchmark White Papers web page.

About

Benchmark announcements, HOW-TOs, Tips and Troubleshooting

Search

Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today