Redefining Storage Economics. Ethernet SAN Comparison of FC (and FCoE), iscsi, and AoE Robert Przykucki, Director of Product Management

Transcription

1 Ethernet SAN Comparison of FC (and FCoE), iscsi, and AoE Robert Przykucki, Director of Product Management November 2010

2 Unique Market Window: Ethernet SAN IT Budget 40% Unsustainable storage costs in uncertain economy Legacy SAN is a poor fit with Cloud and Virtualization Ethernet always wins Storage growth is unstoppable

3 Storage Challenges Legacy SAN 1:1 Mainframe to storage Today s SAN Many:1 Servers to storage Many:1 Virtual to physical servers

4 Scale-out Ethernet SAN Ethernet SAN Bare metal performance No controller bottleneck Eliminates complex topologies No more complex multipathing Ethernet simplicity Lightweight protocol wins!

5 Agenda Evolution of SAN Protocol Comparison Management Comparison Q&A

6 The drive to Ethernet Complexity FICON/ ESCON Fibre Channel FCoE iscsi Ethernet Price-Performance

7 Heavy Weight Protocol Protocol Stack Comparison Fibre Channel iscsi FCoE AoE Block SCSI SCSI SCSI ATA Session FCP iscsi FCP Transport TCP Network Data Link IP FCoE AoE FC Ethernet DCB Ethernet

8 Heavy Weight Protocol Protocol Stack Comparison Fibre Channel iscsi FCoE AoE Block SCSI SCSI SCSI ATA Session MPIO FCP Multi-Path Driver iscsi Required for FC, iscsi and FCoE FCP Transport TCP Network IP FCoE AoE Data Link FC Ethernet DCB Ethernet

9 iscsi: Connection-based, serial delivery iscsi data path 64K IO Transfer Disk ACK iscsi 64K IO Transfer CRC Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment 64K IO Transfer 64K IO: Send to disk TCP Data (IO Segment) CS iscsi Verify iscsi: Verify IO Integrity IP Data Frame #1 Frame #2 Frame #3 Frame #4 Frame #5 Frame #6 Frame #7 Frame #8 Frame #9 TCP: Re-assemble Byte Segments Ethernet Data (Jumbo) CRC ACK Remove IP Header Frame #7 #8 #4 #5 #9 #1 #2 #6 #3 ACK Port 0 Path0 Port 0 ACK Verify CRC, Remove Ethernet Layer Initiator (IO is bound to iscsi connections) Port 1 Port 2 Path1 Path2 Port 1 Port 2 Array Port 3 Path3 Port 3

10 AoE: Connectionless, parallel delivery AoE data path Disk 64K IO Transfer ACK IO AoE 8K block (data) x4 AoE Mapping Write 2A Write 1A Port 0 Path0 Port 0 Write ACK Write ACK Write 2B Write 1B Port 1 Path1 Port 1 AoE Initiator Array Write 2C Write 1C Port 2 Path2 Port 2 Write 2D Write 1D Port 3 Path3 Port 3 Ethernet AoE Data Segment CRC

11 Protocol Summary iscsi/fc/fcoe AoE Topology Connection Connectionless Transport Multi-Path Dropped Data Recovery Out of Order Data Overhead IO Session/Serial delivery IO TCP scatter/gather Multipath Driver Manual Setup iscsi: TCP with Retransmit FC: Link Flow Control, SCSI timeout iscsi: TCP scatter/gather FC: Prevented via Link Level Flow Control Not required Disk IO, Ethernet Frames Not required Automatic AoE Correlation Timeout AoE Retransmit In order arrival not mandated Fibre Channel provides 2-3x higher performance than iscsi AoE is the most direct and fastest SAN protocol

12 Management Comparison

13 Provisioning Fibre Channel FC Stack 60 Minutes 60 Minutes 60 Minutes 30 Minutes 210 Minutes

14 Provisioning Fibre Channel FC Stack

15 Provisioning AoE AoE Stack 15 Minutes 5 Minutes <1 Minute 21 Minutes

16 ESG Lab Validation ESG Lab has tested nearly every major storage system in the industry, and we found the ease of implementation and management of Coraid EtherDrive storage shockingly simple compared to most Fibre Channel and iscsi systems. The simplicity of the system is brilliant, and the price-performance is staggering. It's fair to say we were enormously impressed. - Tony Palmer, Senior Engineer at ESG Lab Higher performance than Fibre Channel at 20% the cost Performance: MB/sec per shelf ESG was able to provision EtherDrive in less than 2 minutes from power on

17 Attendee Questions

18 What is FCoE? Host Requires CNA Additional Configuration Reduces cabling Network Requires TOR Requires DCB, not Ethernet Extra network protocols Storage Does not replace FC Complexities of FC remain Still a separate network FCoE is a bridge technology

19 FCoE or AoE? Use FCoE if? Cabling from your server is the biggest problem in your datacenter You have lots invested in FC Use AoE if? Price/Performance and simplicity are high priority Moving to virtualization and cloud architectures in datacenter Standardizing on Ethernet Things to Consider FCoE requires a CNA adapter Requires ToR switch to bridge FC from FCoE to FC storage island Still requires FC to deliver data to storage Requires lossless datacenter Ethernet Things to Consider No multi-path software Requires jumbo frames (Up to 9K) Use standard Ethernet Works seamlessly with VMware

20 Q&A Thank you Send questions/comments to: Join us for our next webinar: Coraid/VMware: The Secret to Virtualizing Mission Critical Applications Sign up at

21 Extra Slides

22 ESG Review of Ethernet SAN

23 How does FCoE compare to AoE? FCoE Stack Multi-Path Software

24 Where in the stack is AoE relative to iscsi? Protocol iscsi TCP IP AoE Ethernet Use Case Maps the SCSI protocol onto TCP Assumes that initiators are talking over the Internet Assumes a lossless link to transport data Must append a CRC to detect bit errors at destination First conceived by Ham Radio Operators to transfer data Goal: Maximize throughput on high latency links Creeps up onto the right throughput Many standards RFCs describe different TCP implementations Not designed for low latency environments (storage) Does not detect bit errors Guarantees in order byte delivery of data Designed to interconnect Ethernet Networks Internetwork Very sophisticated automated topology optimization Hundreds of RFC s Maps ATA disk commands onto Ethernet Assumes multiple paths between initiator and target Designed to operate on a datagram best effort protocol Very efficient connectionless datagram delivery service Detects bit errors from source to destination

25 Why is Coraid easier to manage? Fibre Channel iscsi AoE Wedge Driver (Multi-Path) MPIO Power Path HDLM SAN Path Veritas DMP Not Required Host Bus Adapter Switch Ethernet Ethernet Storage

26 FCoE Summary Host Requires CNA Additional Configuration Reduces cabling Network Requires TOR Requires DCB, not Ethernet Extra network protocols Storage Does not replace FC Complexities of FC remain Still a separate network FCoE is a bridge technology

27 FCoE Summary Access Layer Servers Requires These And These CNAs DCB Ports IP traffic DCB FC Ports FC traffic To Sustain This? FC traffic LAN FC SAN

28 View 1000-user Block on EtherDrive VMware Management Users View Connection Manager x2 vcenter x1 View / ESX Cluster x2 512 vdts 512 vdts SRX3500 x4 57.6TB 10k RPM SATA SRX TB User Data Storage

29 Is iscsi really slower than FC? 450,000 Oracle 8K Block 700,000 Exchange 4K Block 400, , , , , , , , , ,000 74% drop FCoE iscsi 300, ,000 FCoE iscsi 50, , Brocade 1020 Emulex OCe10102-F Qlogic QLE8142 Brocade 1020 Emulex OCe10102-F Qlogic QLE8142 FC is up to 3x faster than iscsi TCP offload does not help Storage arrays don t use TCP offload engines. How do they cope with the additional iscsi/tcp overhead? See ITBrand Pulse Test Report: Server I/O with Real World Applications Compares vendor CNA IO performance with a RAM storage device, thus exposing CNA bottlenecks