Lab Validation Report

Lab Validation Report Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance Efficient Storage with Advanced Analytics By Vinny Choinski, Senior ESG Lab Analyst, and Mike Leone, ESG Lab Engineer July 2012

2 Contents Introduction...3 Background... 3 Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance... 4 ESG Lab Validation...5 Getting Started... 5 Performance and Efficiency... 8 Availability... 14 ESG Lab Validation Highlights...17 Issues to Consider...17 The Bigger Truth...18 Appendi...19 ESG Lab Reports The goal of ESG Lab reports is to educate IT professionals about data center technology products for companies of all types and sizes. ESG Lab reports are not meant to replace the evaluation process that should be conducted before making purchasing decisions, but rather to provide insight into these emerging technologies. Our objective is to go over some of the more valuable feature/functions of products, show how they can be used to solve real customer problems and identify any areas needing improvement. ESG Lab s epert third- party perspective is based on our own hands- on testing as well as on interviews with customers who use these products in production environments. This ESG Lab report was sponsored by Oracle. All trademark names are property of their respective companies. Information contained in this publication has been obtained by sources The Enterprise Strategy Group (ESG) considers to be reliable but is not warranted by ESG. This publication may contain opinions of ESG, which are subject to change from time to time. This publication is copyrighted by The Enterprise Strategy Group, Inc. Any reproduction or redistribution of this publication, in whole or in part, whether in hard- copy format, electronically, or otherwise to persons not authorized to receive it, without the epress consent of The Enterprise Strategy Group, Inc., is in violation of U.S. copyright law and will be subject to an action for civil damages and, if applicable, criminal prosecution. Should you have any questions, please contact ESG Client Relations at 508.482.0188.

3 Introduction This ESG Lab Validation report documents the results of hands- on testing of the Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance. Testing focused on ease of deployment, high performance, efficiency of hybrid columnar compression, effectiveness of system analytics, and high availability through multiple failure scenarios. Background Organizations of all sizes are struggling to meet the challenges associated with macro- level global financial uncertainty and micro- level information storage growth and compleity. As economic conditions continue to show signs of improvement since the global financial crisis of 2008, corporate spending, including money earmarked for IT products and services, has followed suit. Spending is on the rise, but IT departments must still justify every line item in their budgets. The few statistically significant differences between midmarket and enterprise organizations were consistent with previous LJĞĂƌƐ ƐƵƌǀĞLJƐ. Specifically, factors such as improved regulatory compliance and reduced time to market are viewed as more important among enterprise- class organizations as opposed to midmarket firms. Business process improvement was also more likely to be cited by larger organizations. In terms of cost reduction as a means of justifying IT investments, reducing operating and capital ependitures were both viewed as important by slightly more enterprise organizations. 1 Figure 1. Justification of IT Investments Most important considerations for justifying IT investments to business management teams over the net 12-18 months, by company size. (Percent of respondents, three responses accepted) Business process improvement 39% 45% Reduction in operational ependitures Return on investment / speed of payback 39% 37% 38% 39% Enterprise (1,000 or more employees, N=368) Improved security / risk management Improved regulatory compliance 19% 27% 35% 38% Midmarket (100 to 999 employees, N=246) Reduction in capital ependitures 26% 24% Reduced time- to- market for our products or services 15% 22% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Enterprise Strategy Group, 2012. What do IT managers believe will be the key factors in getting management to sign off on IT investments in 2012? For the first time in four years, the ability to demonstrate a reduction in operational costs is not viewed as the biggest hurdle ŝŷőăŝŷŝŷőŵăŷăőğŵğŷƚ ƐĂƉƉƌŽǀĂů Business process improvement was cited by more organizations as a means of justifying IT spending rather than reducing OPEX. The steady increase in the usage of ROI as a metric for IT investment validation nearly mirrors the pattern of organizations purchasing technologies with improved ROI as a means of cost mitigation. 1 Source: ESG Research Report, 2012 IT Spending Intentions Survey, January 2012.

4 Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance The Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is a unified storage system that offers enterprise- class data services, substantial scale, and significant performance while minimizing cost. The system comes with a web- based management and command line interface and an analytics environment that helps resolve issues before they can affect an organization. Figure 2 shows how a Sun ZFS appliance fits into an IT infrastructure: block protocol access over Fibre Channel SAN; block protocol access through iscsi over InfiniBand, 10Gb Ethernet, and 1Gb Ethernet; and file protocol access (NFS, CIFS, ftp, etc.) over InfiniBand, 10Gb Ethernet, and 1Gb Ethernet. The primary site is then connected to a remote site for disaster recovery through a TCP/IP connection. Figure 2. Sun ZFS Storage Appliance Key benefits of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance include: Oracle Solution IntegrationͶIncreases productivity and speeds up performance and time to market with Oracle- engineered systems and optimized solutions leveraging the storage appliance. Hybrid Columnar CompressionͶYields up to 10 to 50 times better storage efficiency in NAS- based Oracle database archiving for data warehousing and OLTP environments. Hybrid Storage PoolsͶa high- performance storage architecture that integrates read and write specialized flash- based SSDs as a caching tier, increasing enterprise NAS performance without etensive storage administration costs. ZFS file systemͷerror detection and self- healing capabilities eliminate the risk of undetected data corruption and automate the remediation of storage failures. DTrace AnalyticsͶVisual, real- time storage analytics allow customers to better utilize storage resources and reduce future purchases by identifying, troubleshooting, and resolving infrastructure bottlenecks.

5 ESG Lab Validation ESG Lab performed hands- on evaluation and testing of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance at Oracle ƐĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ in Broomfield, Colorado. Testing was designed to demonstrate ease of deployment, performance, efficiency, and high availability. Also of interest was ƚśğƶɛğžĩkƌăđůğ ƐĂŶĂůLJƚŝĐs to monitor system health and performance. Getting Started The configuration used for ESG Lab testing is shown in Figure 3. A Solaris client was connected to an Arista 10GbE Ethernet switch with two dual- port 10GbE host bus adapters (four total ports) configured using layer 3 LACP. The same client was connected to a Brocade 8Gb Fibre Channel switch with two dual- port 8Gb FC HBAs (four total ports) configured with MPXIO, the Solaris multi- pathing software. Both switches were connected to a Sun ZFS Storage 7420, which served as a primary storage site. The appliance had two controllers configured for active/standby operation. The Sun ZFS Storage 7420 may also be configured for active/active access, but this was beyond the scope of the ESG Lab Validation. A mirrored 5.7TB pool based on 15K RPM 300GB drives was created on the storage appliance, as well as a 53TB RAID- Z pool. The appliance was then connected via TCP/IP over a 1GbE wire to a DR site, consisting of a smaller Sun ZFS Storage 7420. The DR site was set up to have a single 6.5TB RAID- Z2 pool. Figure 3. Test Bed ESG Lab Testing Testing started with a review of the configuration process for a pre- racked base OS- loaded Sun ZFS Storage Appliance. The Lab used the Oracle web- based management software to conduct the initial configuration. Figure 4 shows the configuration wizard that was used for system setup. Supplied with eisting host and network information from the Oracle support team, ESG Lab leveraged this wizard to configure the appliance quickly. The wizard guided the Lab through each part of the process from hostname and password creation to network setup through storage pools and file system eport configuration.

6 Figure 4. Welcome As shown in Figure 5, the configuration wizard provided the Lab with storage protection profiles to select from for the criterion of the storage pools and the subsequent location for the file system eport. It is worth noting that each step of the process offered the same level of guidance shown here. Figure 5. Disk Configuration

7 Net, ESG Lab took a deep dive through the management interface features of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance. Figure 6 shows a physical view of the storage controller: highlighted on the left is a single DIMM, with more information provided about that particular DIMM in the blown out image to the right. This feature is available not just for DIMMs, but also for all physical components in the controller. ESG Lab leveraged this feature during the availability portion of the testing to accelerate identification of faulty components. Figure 6. Memory Why This Matters Storage capacity requirements and management compleity continue to grow as user data and deployed applications proliferate within organizations. IT managers are being asked to meet these requirements continuously with IT budgets that are flat or declining, while continuing to support high service levels for growing organizations. A pressing need for better server and storage management capabilities, including tightly integrated management tools, has never been more apparent. ESG Lab confirmed the initial installation of a Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was quick and easy. The crisp, cleanly designed user interface employed to initially configure and manage the system was also worth noting. The provisioning of storage was made easy with profiles to fit the needs of any business application. The interface was easy to follow, intuitive, and provided an innovative level of management granularity.

8 Performance and Efficiency The Sun ZFS Storage Appliance file system, Oracle Solaris ZFS, delivers high performance through efficient optimization. The file system is designed to detect I/O patterns and optimize for performance using Hybrid Storage Pools. ĨĨŝĐŝĞŶĐLJŝƐĂůƐŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚŚƌŽƵŐŚKƌĂĐůĞ Ɛ,LJďrid Columnar Compression (HCC). HCC is capable of reducing in- database archives for OLTP, data warehousing, or mied- workload data volumes down to sizes that are up to 10 to 50 times smaller than the original. ESG Lab Testing ESG Lab audited published results of the SPECsfs and SPC- 1 benchmark suite. SPECsfs is a benchmark that measures NFS file server throughput and response times. It provides a standardized method for comparing performance of NFS file servers across different vendor platforms. The benchmark is client independent and vendor neutral. Results must conform to a set of run and disclosure rules that are validated through a peer- review process before being published. ESG Lab compared the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance SPECsfs results with other published results from various vendors. As shown in Figure 7, the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was able to generate 943 (ops/sec/disk), while still maintaining a high level of throughput with 267,928 (ops/sec). As detailed in Table 1, the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance configuration had a fraction of the total number of drives when compared with the other configurations tested. Such high throughput and low response time from a small number of disks proves out the effectiveness of the unique Hybrid Storage Pool architecture of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance. Also notable is the overall response time (ORT). The ORT is a measure of how quickly the server responds to NFS operation requests over a range of increasing levels of traffic. The Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was between 10% and 40% faster in operation response than the other configurations tested. Figure 7. SPECsfs Comparisons (ops/sec/disk) 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 Operations Per Disk Performance Results (More is better.) Oracle Hitachi EMC Isilon NetApp HP SPECsfs Summary Table 1. SPECsfs Comparisons Summary System ops/sec/disk File Systems Throughput ORT (ms) Total Disk Sun ZFS Storage 7420 Appliance 943.41 32 267,928 1.31 284 HDS 3090- G2 510.74 4 189,994 2.08 372 EMC Celerra VG8 Isilon S200 (140 Node) 434.36 331.16 4 1 135,521 1,112,705 1.92 2.54 312 3,360 NetApp FAS3270 281.06 2 101,183 1.66 360 HP BL860 i2 225.39 16 333,574 1.68 1,480

9 What the Numbers Mean The Sun ZFS Storage Appliance had the highest ops/sec/disk of the si systems eamined in the summary and achieved almost double (85% better) the ops/sec/disk of the second- highest system. The total number of drives for the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was a fraction of the number of disks used by the other configurations in this SPECsfs summary. KƌĂĐůĞ ƐKZdof 1.31 ms was about 20% faster than the net fastest vendor and more than 48% faster than the slowest. The SPC- 1 application- level industry- standard benchmark suite is maintained by the Storage Performance Council. SPC- 1 testing generates a single workload designed to emulate the typical functions of transaction- oriented, real- world database applications. Transaction- oriented applications are generally characterized by largely random I/O and generate both queries (reads) and updates (writes). Eamples of these types of applications include OLTP, database operations, and mail server implementations. SPC- 1 includes a price- performance metric to provide a relative indication of the cost of handling storage demands in a typical transaction- oriented application environment. Figure 8 and Table 2 show the SPC- 1 price- performance results for five industry- leading storage vendors, including Oracle. Price- performance is shown as dollars per SPC- 1 IOP. Systems with a lower cost are better from a price- performance perspective. Oracle has the best published SPC- 1 price- performance rating at $2.99 per SPC- 1 IOPS. Figure 8. SPC- 1 Comparisons SPC- 1 Price Performance Results (Less is better.) (dollar/spc- 1 IOPS) $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 Oracle HDS Oracle NetApp IBM SPC- 1 Summary Table 2. SPC- 1 Comparisons System SPC- 1 Price Performance SPC- 1 IOPS Sun ZFS Storage 7420 Appliance $2.99 137,066 HDS AMS2500 $6.71 89,491 Oracle 6780 $6.89 62,261 NetApp 3270 $7.48 68,035 IBM V7000 $7.52 53,014 Data Protection Level Mirroring Mirroring Mirroring RAID DP Mirroring Total ASU Capacity 23,703.035GB 15,900.000GB 13,742.218GB 21,659.386GB 24,433.592GB

10 What the Numbers Mean The price performance of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was only $2.99, making it 55% lower than the net listed vendor. The SPC- 1 IOPS of the Oracle solution was 137,066. This is 53% more SPC- 1 IOPS than the second- highest vendor tested. Not only is the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance the most cost effective, it also yields the most SPC- 1 IOPS when compared with the configurations tested. After auditing the performance results, ESG Lab set out to test the unique- to- Oracle HCC by using KƌĂĐůĞ Ɛequally innovative analytics. Run through the management interface, the analytics provide a comprehensive and intuitive environment to quickly identify and diagnose system performance issues, perform capacity planning, and proactively debug live storage and networking problems before they become an issue. Oracle also has client- side analytics, called Enterprise Manager, which monitor host- side resource utilization. ESG Lab used an 810GB database filled with retail transaction data as a baseline and chose three types of compression to show how resource utilization and duration differ based on compression type. Compression rates and database sizes are also affected based on the compression selection. The three compression types and epect- ed compression ratios were: Sun ZFS Storage Appliance GZIP (8:1), HCC Query Low (10:1), and HCC Archive High (30:1). A view of the analytics interface from a CPU, a network, and a disk utilization perspective with the baseline and three HCC types run one after the other on the primary site utilizing a 10GbE network is shown in Figure 9. A pop- out image shows a view of the CPU utilization on the host side for just the archive high compression. Figure 9. Hybrid Columnar Compression, Primary Site, 10GbE

11 Baseline and GZIP are done primarily on the storage system side, which eplains the higher CPU utilization, network consumption, and disk utilization. Database operations traverse the network from the client to the storage system and are then compressed. The better the compression rate, the lower the disk utilization. Specifically, Archive High yielded the best compression rate (about 30:1), but took the most time to complete. This is due to the fact that the compression is done on the client side. As shown in the pop- out image in Figure 9, the host reached a CPU bottleneck while compressing the database, causing the Archive High compression to take a little more than 20 minutes. The important resource to notice is the network utilization: Because of the high compression rate Archive High provides, the 810GB database was reduced to 29GB, which reduced the amount of data being sent over the network for subsequent database operations. ESG Lab net tested the remote site, which had only a 1GbE network. Figure 10 shows the results of HCC on the remote site, focusing on the network utilization and NFSv3 operations. Due to the etended duration, only part of the baseline is visible. What is different, when compared with the primary site, is that the time to complete an operation for the 810GB baseline database and Sun ZFS Storage Appliance GZIP has significantly increased. This was due solely to the network speed: The 1GbE network became the bottleneck for these compression types. Archive High was not affected by the slower network speed because the resource load moved to the host- side CPU. Figure 10. Hybrid Columnar Compression, Remote Site, 1GbE

12 Net, ESG Lab compared compression ratios with (full table scan) database operation durations. A full table scan refers to the amount of time it takes to scan through an entire database. This is the same database operation used to display the results in Figure 9 and Figure 10. Figure 11 and Table 3 show both the capacity differences based on compression type as well as table scan durations for the primary and remote site. The left side of the chart shows database capacity after being compressed, and the right side of the chart shows the elapsed time of a table scan. The capacity savings from baseline to archive high (left to right) are quite good. Also notice the table scan durations between the two sites: Due to network bandwidth differences between the primary and remote site, the table scans for baseline and GZIP show a big difference. A table scan of the Archive High compressed database is unaffected by the network bandwidth change. Figure 11. Hybrid Columnar Compression, Capacity and Table Scan Times Table 3. Compression Comparisons Table Scan ͶCount(*)ͶElapsed Time Compression Type Number of Rows Size Primary SiteͶ10GbE Remote SiteͶ1GbE Baseline 5,831,873,159 810GB 8:55.09 2:31:05.66 GZIP 5,831,873,159 107GB 6:49.43 2:39:06.78 Query Low 5,831,873,159 85.3GB 7:26.30 12:41.03 Archive High 5,831,873,159 29.2GB 20:59.61 21:22.69

13 What the Numbers Mean The number of rows (5,831,873,159) remains unaffected by compression type. The database size reduces based on the epected compression ratios. The 810GB database at baseline is reduced to 29.2GB at the Archive High compression type. The duration of a table scan changes due to network differences between the primary and remote site. The baseline database on a 10GbE network takes almost nine minutes. With the 1GbE network, the table scan for the baseline database takes more than two and half hours. The Archive High compressed database is unaffected by the network change and still takes about 21 minutes to complete. Customers with limited CPU resources and ecess network bandwidth may optimize system efficiency with Sun ZFS Storage Appliance compression. Though GZIP and Query Low have similar compression ratios (8:1 and 10:1), GZIP is still dependent on network bandwidth for table scans (0:06:49 on a primary site vs. 2:39:06 on a remote site), whereas Query Low is not (0:07:26 on a primary site vs. 12:41 on a remote site). Customers with ecess CPU resources and limited network bandwidth may optimize system efficiency with Oracle HCC compression. Why This Matters Demanding throughput requirements and increased compleity due to storage growth are creating problems for storage managers. Powerful tools to optimize performance and efficiency are lacking, creating the potential for compromised application performance. A storage solution providing greater storage efficiency and performance, as well as effective monitoring tools, is becoming a necessity for IT professionals. ESG Lab confirmed that from a performance and efficiency standpoint, the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was quite remarkable. The audited SPECsfs and SPC- 1 performance results were impressive. The ops/sec/disk for SPECsfs was well above competitors ƌğɛƶůƚɛ, and the price- performance metric for SPC- 1 was strikingly lower than that of the compared vendors. The capabilities of the Hybrid Columnar Compression were very impressive, especially when comparing the baseline consumed capacity of 810GB to the Archive High compression of less than 30GB. It was enlightening to see how different compression types consume resources and how they can be matched to different data requirements.

14 Availability The Sun ZFS Storage Appliance offers both local and remote data- protection options. It can be configured locally as either an active/active or active/passive HA cluster and configured to replicate to another remote Sun ZFS Storage Appliance for etended DR capabilities ESG Lab Testing After eploring the deployment and manageability aspects of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance, as well as the high performance and compression capabilities, ESG Lab tested the high- availability features of the storage appliance. The Lab validated three failure scenarios: a power supply failure, storage controller failure, and a primary site failure. Figure 12 shows the results of a power supply failure: The management interface highlights the failed component on the storage appliance diagram and provides details about the failed component. Figure 12. Power Supply Failure

15 Net, the Lab failed the primary storage controller, causing the secondary controller to take control of the system (see Figure 13). The failback screen shows the primary controller being active and the secondary controller in a ready state in case a failure occurs. After the failure, the secondary controller moved to an active state, while the other controller moved to an unknown state. The failed controller is marked with a red X, and the controller names are shown switched in the management interface. Upon recovery, the failed controller remained in the ready state until the net occurrence of a controller failure. A common reason for manually changing active controllers is to facilitate firmware upgrades to the system. One controller will reboot to complete the upgrade, while the other takes control. Figure 13. Controller Failback

16 Finally, ESG Lab conducted a primary site failure. The Lab first enabled remote replication to a DR site; this allowed data to be immediately accessible at the remote site upon a full site failure. Figure 14 shows the replication interface as well as a high- level view of the site failover. Net, the passive controller on the primary site was shut down, and a hard stop was issued on the active controller. With replication no longer possible due to the primary site being offline, the Lab confirmed its ability to access data from the DR location. Figure 14. Remote Site Failover Why This Matters The realities of time and budget constraints require many organizations to implement different data- protection strategies to handle different scenarios (e.g., disaster recovery, backups, restores, and data migrations). This can result in protection gaps that leave data vulnerable. Regardless of the hardware failures that may occur during the lifecycle of electronically stored information, organizations epect their data to be always available with the click of a button. ESG Lab confirmed that the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was able to provide high data availability through three diverse failure scenarios. Data was instantly available and unaffected through a power supply failure, a storage controller failure, and a primary site failure.

17 ESG Lab Validation Highlights ; Initial installation of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was quick and painless. ; Configuring and managing the system through the well- designed user interface was easy. Guidance for configuration and provisioning at each step was particularly impressive. ; The audit of the SPECsfs and SPC- 1 performance numbers resulted in great comparisons against other industry leaders. The ops/sec/disk metric used for SPECsfs was more than 85% better than the net highest vendor. The dollars/spc- 1 IOP was 55% lower than the net lowest vendor. ; Hybrid Columnar Compression provided great capacity savings and therefore cost effectiveness. The highest compression rate, Archive High, reduced an 810GB database to only 29GB, saving more than 95% of needed capacity. ; ESG Lab was able to easily access data throughout three failure scenarios: a power supply failure, storage controller failure, and primary site failure. Issues to Consider ; While the management interface proved intuitive and easy to navigate, ESG Lab did notice what appeared to be a browser refresh icon in the upper- right corner of many of the management pages. This icon turned out to be for rebooting the system, not for performing a simple screen refresh. The Lab suggests administrators become familiar with this feature to avoid an unintentional reboot. ; ESG Lab found the overall data- management capabilities of the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance to be etremely efficient. We believe, however, that the addition of a global namespace or file system feature capable of spanning multiple data profiles with the same class of service would be a great complement to the solution. We would be ecited to see this feature in a future release.

18 The Bigger Truth Storage requirements are becoming harder and harder to manageͷenterprise applications, virtualization, management of file- and block- based dataͷthe list goes on. With strict budget limitations, IT managers are being pressured to do more with less. To address the storage- compleity increases, the high costs, and the performance epectations of most organizations, a better approach providing greater storage efficiency and simplified storage management is needed. Such a solution must be able to simplify day- to- day tasks related to maintaining, monitoring, and managing not just structured database data, but unstructured data as well. Oracle has created the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance to combat ever- growing requirements related to storage environment efficiency. ESG Lab testing confirms that the appliance allows organizations to increase performance and reduce IT costs through the use of advanced analytics, simple management tools, and multiple levels of data protection. Installing, provisioning, and managing the Sun ZFS Storage Appliance was simplified via the detailed yet intuitive management interface. ESG Lab was able to configure a system with minimal guidance from supporting Oracle staff, and performance tuning was etremely easy, making overall system deployment time very quick. Storage capacity efficiency is important, regardless of organization size. With various database HCC options available for the appliance, different compression ratios can be applied to different types of operations, enabling capacity savings without affecting application performance or creating bottlenecks. Specifically, with the Archive High compression option, ESG Lab was able to condense an 810GB database to 29GB while balancing system and storage resources for specific query types. ESG Lab was etremely impressed with the comprehensive analytics built into the appliance and its potential cost- saving ability, as the benefits of analytic tools can often be outweighed by their cost. Oracle analytics proactively monitor the storage infrastructure and identify problems before they can impair business workflows. After seeing it in action, we feel the analytics would provide great value to any organization looking for cost- effective, proactive data- management capabilities. KƌĂĐůĞ Ɛ^ƵŶ&^^ƚŽƌĂŐĞƉƉůŝĂŶĐĞŽƉƚŝŵŝnjĞƐƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞĂŶĚĐĂƉĂĐŝƚLJ while minimizing system downtime, deployment time, and cost. The easy- to- use administration features help create an agile storage environment with an economic advantage. With tight Oracle database integration, this high- performance appliance delivers enterprise capabilities with simplicity and efficiency in a cost- effective package.

19 Appendi Table 4. ESG Lab Test Bed Sun ZFS Storage 7420 Appliance Primary Site Storage DR Site Storage Solaris 10, Oracle 11.2.0.3 + patch 1334343 Ethernet Switch Fibre Channel Switch ZFS Storage Appliance Client Oracle 11.2.0.3 + HCC patch Sun ZFS Storage 7000 Software 2011.1.2.1 15K RPM 300GB drives 1 5.7TB pool 1 53TB RAID- Z pool 15K RPM 300GB drives 6.5TB RAID- Z2 pool LACP MPXIO Network Arista DCS7148SX 10GbE Brocade 5300 8Gb Hybrid Columnar Compression Types BaselineͶ1:1 compression ratio Sun ZFS Storage Appliance GZIPͶ8:1 HCC Query LowͶ10:1 HCC Archive HighͶ30:1

20 Asylum Street Milford, MA 01757 Tel: 508.482.0188 Fa: 508.482.0218 www.enterprisestrategygroup.com