<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: VM Snapshot and performances in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/VM-Snapshot-and-performances/m-p/100908#M20468</link>
    <description>Read additional information:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A target="_blank" href="http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&amp;amp;cmd=displayKC&amp;amp;externalId=2000058"&gt;http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&amp;amp;cmd=displayKC&amp;amp;externalId=2000058&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2015 03:57:35 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Turabo</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-02-21T03:57:35Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VM Snapshot and performances</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/VM-Snapshot-and-performances/m-p/100817#M20450</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;With&amp;nbsp;a FAS2552 (10 GbE), Data Ontap 8.2.2P1, NFS,&amp;nbsp;on a 17x SAS 600 GB aggregate, a Windows 2008 R2 virtual machine shows low performances with SQLIO random writes (and reads). We applied VSC recommanded settings on ESXi (5.5).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;workload : Random Write 8K block without cache on 10 GB file&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;When there is a snapshot on the VM :&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;D:\PARAM\sqlio -kW -s30 -frandom -o8 -b8 -LS -BN -Fparam.txt&lt;BR /&gt;sqlio v1.5.SG&amp;nbsp;using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second&amp;nbsp;parameter file used: param.txt&amp;nbsp;file D:\testfile.dat with 4 threads (0-3) using mask 0x0 (0)&amp;nbsp;4 threads writing for 30 secs to file D:\testfile.dat&amp;nbsp;using 8KB random IOs&amp;nbsp;enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding&amp;nbsp;buffering set to not use file nor disk caches (as is SQL Server)&amp;nbsp;using specified size: 5000 MB for file: D:\testfile.dat&amp;nbsp;initialization done&lt;BR /&gt;CUMULATIVE DATA&amp;amp;colon;&lt;BR /&gt;throughput metrics:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;IOs/sec: 1762.79&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;MBs/sec: 13.77&lt;BR /&gt;latency metrics:&lt;BR /&gt;Min_Latency(ms): 0&lt;BR /&gt;Avg_Latency(ms): 17&lt;BR /&gt;Max_Latency(ms): 468&lt;BR /&gt;histogram:&lt;BR /&gt;ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+&lt;BR /&gt;%: 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 37 40 5 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A 10 GB file should be entirely on the cache of the FAS2552. Even when it reads in a VM snapshot.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;After removing snapshot :&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;f:\PARAM\sqlio -kW -s60 -frandom -o8 -b8 -LS -BN -Fparam.txt&lt;BR /&gt;sqlio v1.5.SG&amp;nbsp;using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second&amp;nbsp;parameter file used: param.txt&amp;nbsp;file F:\testfile.dat with 4 threads (0-3) using mask 0x0 (0)&amp;nbsp;4 threads writing for 60 secs to file F:\testfile.dat&amp;nbsp;using 8KB random IOs&amp;nbsp;enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding&amp;nbsp;buffering set to not use file nor disk caches (as is SQL Server)&amp;nbsp;using specified size: 10000 MB for file: F:\testfile.dat&amp;nbsp;initialization done&lt;BR /&gt;CUMULATIVE DATA&amp;amp;colon;&lt;BR /&gt;throughput metrics:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;IOs/sec: 15203.99&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;MBs/sec: 118.78&lt;BR /&gt;latency metrics:&lt;BR /&gt;Min_Latency(ms): 0&lt;BR /&gt;Avg_Latency(ms): 1&lt;BR /&gt;Max_Latency(ms): 30&lt;BR /&gt;histogram:&lt;BR /&gt;ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+&lt;BR /&gt;%: 1 63 25 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Near 10x IOPS.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The difference is a big difference. It's more a VMware subject but it is good to know.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 05:03:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/VM-Snapshot-and-performances/m-p/100817#M20450</guid>
      <dc:creator>CLOCATEL75</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T05:03:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VM Snapshot and performances</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/VM-Snapshot-and-performances/m-p/100908#M20468</link>
      <description>Read additional information:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A target="_blank" href="http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&amp;amp;cmd=displayKC&amp;amp;externalId=2000058"&gt;http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&amp;amp;cmd=displayKC&amp;amp;externalId=2000058&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2015 03:57:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/VM-Snapshot-and-performances/m-p/100908#M20468</guid>
      <dc:creator>Turabo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-02-21T03:57:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

