Ron,
   
  The XP256 is a decent box, but only 1/2 the speed of the XP512. 
   
  The ldev assignment within the XP is very important when it comes to performance.  Did you spread your ldevs across ACP's and raidgroups? 
   
  You didn't mention how much Array Cache you have in the XP256, keep in mind the XP storage array is cache centric, meaning everything goes through cache. With the XP256, I would max out the array cache.
   
  You also did not mention what model server you are connecting the XP256 too?
  

  Remember always spread your I/O...  across XP ports/ XP cards/ XP array groups/ XP ACP's Host HBA's/ Host System Bus Adapters / switch ports.
   
  Regards,
   
  -Craig
   
   
   
  

   
  

Ron Keiper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
  We are in the process of migrating our HVD10 storage to an XP256 via FW-SCSI
and I/O Expansion (1828A) cabinets. Our performance testing thus far, show a
large increase in cpu pause, and disk queuing on the XP256 system. Job run
time is similar within 5 - 10 minutes on a 1 hour job. 
I have seen many posts about the XP being a great deal faster, but we are
not seeing that and have concerns about moving forward with our migration. 
I am wondering if it is set up properly for best performance.. etc.. 

Does anyone have any insight or ideas about this ? The XP is set up raid
1 I believe, ( OPEN-9 in DSTAT ) and are set up as HPDARRAY in sysgen. Is
that the correct sysgen id for the xp ? 
There are a similar # of drives/LUNs on both of our test volume sets. The
HVD is setup as mirror/iX. 

Thanks for any info you could provide. 

Ron Keiper
The Nielsen Company.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *


       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *