For some reason, I find it very easy to come across REV A12 of the EMC® Symmetrix®Virtual Provisioning™ documentation referenced below compared to REV A14. Putting up this blog post more for myself than others... perhaps this way I'll easily be able to track down REV A14. For me REV A14 is important because its when the general recommendation switched from concatenated metas to striped metas. No doubt the performance benefits were the motivation, and EMC waited until enough operations on striped metas were possible to ease administrative burden of recommending striped metas.
I find the recommendation of striped metas especially important for Oracle redo logs and SQL Server transaction logs when SRDF synchronous replication is used. This is because the serialization required for replication has less of a performance drag with striped metas than concatenated metas. Striped metas may also help when asynchronous replication is used, because of the write cache policies on the VMAX.
************************************************************************************
Best Practices for Fast, Simple Capacity Allocation with EMC® Symmetrix®Virtual Provisioning™
In
most cases, EMC recommends using concatenated rather than striped metadevices
with Virtual Provisioning.
Page 12
************************************************************************************
Best Practices for Fast, Simple Capacity Allocation with EMC® Symmetrix®Virtual Provisioning™
In most cases, EMC recommends using striped rather than
concatenated metadevices with Virtual Provisioning because they
offer the following advantages:
With
Synchronous SRDF®, Enginuity allows one outstanding write per thin device per
path. With concatenated metadevices, this could cause a performance problem by
limiting the concurrency of writes.
This limit will not affect striped metadevices in the same
way because of the small size of the metavolume stripe (1 cylinder or 1920
blocks).
In Enginuity
releases prior to 5875, the code allows eight read requests per path per thin
device. This may limit the number of read requests that can be passed through
to the thin pool regardless of the number of data devices it contains. This can
cause slower performance in environments with a high read miss rate. A striped
metadevice offers improved throughput, because each metamember is allowed to
queue requests to the backend in parallel. Even with the limit removed in
Enginuity 5875, there are still potential performance benefits to using striped
thin metas over concatenated thin metas.
Symmetrix
Enginuity has a logical volume write pending limit to prevent one volume from
monopolizing writeable cache. Because each metamember gets a small percentage
of cache, a striped meta is likely to offer more writeable cache to the
metavolume.
However, concatenated thin metadevices do offer two important
operational advantages over striped thin metadevices:
Non-metadevices can be converted to concatenated metadevices without destroying
the existing data. Beginning with Enginuity 5875 and Solutions Enabler 7.2,
it’s possible to convert a thin device into a concatenated meta without
unmapping the device first.
Concatenated
thin metadevices can be expanded without destroying existing data by adding
metamembers to an existing metadevice. Beginning with Enginuity 5875, a striped
metadevice can also be expanded while preserving existing data.
Pages 12-13