E
dit
A
ttach
P
rintable
r12 - 2014-04-02 - 15:10:36 - Main.gcovell
You are here:
TWiki
>
Deployment Web
>
DeploymentPlanningAndDesign
>
PerformanceDatasheetsAndSizingGuidelines
>
PerformanceImpactOfDifferentRAIDWritePolicy
<div id="header-title" style="padding: 10px 15px; border-width:1px; border-style:solid; border-color:#FFD28C; background-image: url(<nop>https://jazz.net/wiki/pub/Deployment/WebPreferences/TLASE.jpg); background-size: cover; font-size:120%"> <!-- * Set ALLOWTOPICCHANGE = Main.TWikiDeploymentDatasheetsAuthorsGroup, Main.TWikiAdminGroup, Main.GrantCovell --> ---+!! <img src="https://jazz.net/wiki/pub/Deployment/WebPreferences/uc.png" alt="uc.png" width="50" height="50" align="right">CLM ETL Performance Impact of different RAID Write Policy Setting on Data Warehouse</br> %DKGRAY% Authors: Main.PengPengWang</br> Last updated: Nov. 21, 2013</br> Build basis: CLM 4.0.4 %ENDCOLOR%</div></sticky> <!-- Page contents top of page on right hand side in box --> <sticky><div style="float:right; border-width:1px; border-style:solid; border-color:#DFDFDF; background-color:#F6F6F6; margin:0 0 15px 15px; padding: 0 15px 0 15px;"> %TOC{title="Page contents"}% </div></sticky> <sticky><div style="margin:15px;"></sticky> ---++ Introduction The report presents the performance impact of the ETL with different RAID Write Cache Policy for the data warehouse. Data Manager ETL (A.K.A DM ETL) is the powerful tool to extract/transform/load the CLM operational data into the data warehouse, then the reporting of CLM can show the complex statistics and trends charts. Our client can use the DM ETL to load their historical operational data from one or multiple CLM servers. The DM ETL has initial load and delta load. During ETL working, there are frequent and larege amount of INSERT and UPDATE operation. That is one kind of high frequent write IO with small size of random data. These two operations are all need Disk Write operation onto the data warehouse. The Disk Write maybe the IO bottleneck or the key factor of the ETL performance. RAID controoler has Write Cache Policy that has differenct IO Write performace against different policies. This article is target to try to find the IO Write bottle neck for JAVA/DM ETL. And try to find the ETL performance impact of RAID write cache policy on the data warehouse. ---++Summary of results The setting of RAID Write Cache Policy has two kinds of typical policy: Write Through and Write Back. Write Back mode will get significant gain on the random IO and small size committed to Disk. ETL fetches the data from point products and insert/update them into data warehouse.We make the comparison of the ETL performance with only one change factor - The RAID Write Cache policy of data warehouser. We run twice of the JAVA and DM ETL with the different RAID Write Cache Policy:Write Through VS.Write Back. Based on performance teams test data and test configuration, the Java Star job improves significantly compared with Write Through mode. The duration reduced from 7 hour to 50 minutes. And the performance of JAVA CCM/QM/RM also has a little improvement. However, there is no significant performance impact for the DM ETL. NOTE: You can get the knowlege of RAID and RAID Write Cache from the links mentioned in [[#ForMoreInformation][For More Information]] ---+++!! Disclaimer %INCLUDE{"PerformanceDatasheetDisclaimer"}% ---++ Topology The topology under test is based on [[https://jazz.net/library/article/820#Enterprise_Distributed_Linux__DB2][Standard Topology (E1) Enterprise - Distributed / Linux / DB2.]] <img src="https://jazz.net/library/content/articles/clm/2011/standard-clm-topologies/images/Enterprise_Distributed_Linux_DB2_640.png" alt="Server Overview" width="70%" height="70%" /> The test uses IBM X3550 M3 (!ServeRAID M5015 SAS/SATA Controller, 3 of IBM 300 GB 2.5in SFF Slim-HS 10K 6Gbps SAS HDD) as the ESX server. And the 3 HDD combined with RAID0. The specifications of machines under test are listed in the table below. Server tuning details listed in *[[#AppendixA][Appendix A]]* This case study used the same test environment and same test data to test the ETL performance for CLM 4.0.3 and CLM 4.0.4. Test data was generated using automation. The test environment for the latest release was upgraded from the earlier one by using the CLM upgrade process. The !WebSphere Application Server was version 8.5.1, 64-bit. The database server was IBM DB2 9.7.5, 64-bit. The Rational Reporting for Development Intelligence tool was version 2.0.4. The Jazz Team Sever, CCM, QM, and RM applications co-existed in the same !WebSphere Application Server profile. The JVM setting was as follows: <verbatim> -verbose:gc -XX:+PrintGCDetails -Xverbosegclog:gc.log -Xgcpolicy:gencon -Xmx8g -Xms8g -Xmn1g -Xcompressedrefs -Xgc:preferredHeapBase=0x100000000 -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=1g </verbatim> IBM Tivoli Directory Server was used for managing user authentication. <table class="gray-table"> <tbody> <tr> <th valign="top">Function</th> <th valign="top">Number of Machines</th> <th valign="top">Machine Type</th> <th valign="top">CPU / Machine</th> <th valign="top">Total # of CPU Cores/Machine</th> <th valign="top">Memory/Machine</th> <th valign="top">Disk</th> <th valign="top">Disk capacity</th> <th valign="top">Network interface</th> <th valign="top">OS and Version</th> </tr> <tr> <td>ESXServer1</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM X3550 M3 7944J2A </td> <td>1 x Intel Xeon E5-2640 2.5GHz (six-core)</td> <td>12</td> <td>36GB</td> <td>RAID0 SAS x3 300G 10k rpm </td> <td>900G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>ESXi4.1 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>JTS/RM Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 1</td> <td>4 vCPU</td> <td>16GB</td> <td> </td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Database Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 1</td> <td>4 vCPU</td> <td>16GB</td> <td> </td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>RRDI Development Tool</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 1</td> <td>2 vCPU</td> <td>4GB</td> <td></td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Windwos 2008 Enterprise R2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>ESXServer2</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM X3550 M3 7944J2A </td> <td>1 x Intel Xeon E5-2640 2.5GHz (six-core)</td> <td>12</td> <td>36GB</td> <td>RAID0 SAS x3 300G 10k rpm </td> <td>900G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>ESXi4.1 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>CCM Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 2</td> <td>4 vCPU</td> <td>16GB</td> <td> </td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>QM Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 2</td> <td>4 vCPU</td> <td>16GB</td> <td> </td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Data Warehouse Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM on IBM System x3550 M3</td> <td>EsxServer 1</td> <td>4 vCPU</td> <td>16GB</td> <td> </td> <td>120G</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> ---+++Data volume and shape The data volume listed in *[[#AppendixB][Appendix B]]* ---+++Network connectivity All server machines and test clients are located on the same subnet. The LAN has 1000 Mbps of maximum bandwidth and less than 0.3ms latency in ping. ---++Methodology The tests determine the performance impact of the ETL benchmark based on the give topology and data volume. CLM server provides the start point of the JAVA ETL on the admin web page. ETL performance test of JAVA ETL collects the ETL logs and makes the result analysis after the JAVA ETL completed. The DM ETL works on the RRDI Develoment Tool (Cognos Data Manager). The Cognos Data Manager help to do the ETL via the RRDI JDBC/ODBC Driver. The performance test collects the ETL log and make the result analysis. This test make the comparison of performance through changing the RAID Write Cache Polocy. ---++Risk and Mitigation In Write-Through caching, the controller sends a data-transfer completion signal to the host system when the disk subsystem has received all the data in a transaction. In Write-Back caching, the controller sends a data transfer completion signal to the host when the controller cache has received all the data in a transaction. The controller then writes the cached data to the storage device in the background. The risk of using Write Back is that the cached data can be lost if such conditions: * The power down before the cached data written to disk. The mitigation: * By adding the BBU (Battery Backup Unit), the cached data can be write into disk after the power on. * By using UPS as backup power. * The RAID Controller crashed. The mitigation: * Replace the RAID Controller with same type, the RAID BIOS will rebuild the RAID info. The cached data lost will lead to the current Delta ETL failure. However, it is <b>Low risk</b> for ETL and data warehouse. In another word, we can think there is no delta ETL happened on that day. After the RAID recovery, the next delta ETL will keep the data integrity by loading the data again. However, if there are other databases exists on the same server where the data warehouse locates, please <b>be careful </b> to use this recommendation. The risk is that you may lost the key trasaction data once the RAID broken, if the application has no remedial measures. ---++Test Results Details ---+++JAVA ETL Comparison From the test result comparison shown, the JAVA star job get big performance gain. The performance of star job improved about 8 times using Write Back policy compared with Write Through Policy. The CCM job has 10% improvement. And the performance of the others keep flat result. <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/JAVAETLComparison_RAIDWriteCachePolicy.png" alt="JAVAETLComparison_RAIDWriteCacheSetting.png" align="center" width="70%" height="70%"/> ---+++DM ETL Comparison From the test result comparison shown, the DM ETL jobs has similar ETL duration compared with the setting of Write Back policy and Write Through Policy. So, there is no significant performance impact for the DM ETL along with the change of the RAID Write cache policy. <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/DMETLComparison_RAIDWriteCachePolicy.png" alt="JAVAETLComparison_RAIDWriteCacheSetting.png" align="center" width="70%" height="70%"/> ---++ Appendix A #AppendixA <table class="gray-table"> <tbody> <tr> <th align="left" width="200"><strong>Product</strong><br></th> <th align="left" width="100"><strong>Version</strong></th> <th align="left" width="600"><strong>Highlights for configurations under test</strong></th> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">IBM !WebSphere Application Server</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">8.5.0.1</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;"><strong>JVM settings:</strong> * GC policy and arguments, max and init heap sizes: <verbatim> -verbose:gc -XX:+PrintGCDetails -Xverbosegclog:gc.log -Xgcpolicy:gencon -Xmx8g -Xms8g -Xmn1g -Xcompressedrefs -Xgc:preferredHeapBase=0x100000000 -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=1g </verbatim> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>DB2</td> <td>DB2 9.7.5</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;"><strong>Transaction log setting of data warehouse:</strong> * Transaction log size changed to 40960 <verbatim> db2 update db cfg using LOGFILSIZ=40960 </verbatim> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>LDAP server</td> <td>IBM Tivoli Directory Server 6.3</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>License server</td> <td> </td> <td>Hosted locally by JTS server</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Network</td> <td> </td> <td>Shared subnet within test lab</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> ---++Appendix B #AppendixB <table class="gray-table"> <tr> <th></th> <th><strong>Record type</strong></th> <th><strong>Initial load</strong></th> <th><strong>Delta load</strong></th> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>CCM</strong></td> <td>APT_ProjectCapacity</td> <td>1</td> <td>1</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>APT_TeamCapacity</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Build</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Build Result</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Build Unit Test Result</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Build Unit Test Events</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Complex !CustomAttribute</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Custom Attribute</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>File Classification</td> <td>3</td> <td>3</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>First Stream Classification</td> <td>3</td> <td>3</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>History Custom Attribute</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>SCM Component</td> <td>2</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>SCM !WorkSpace</td> <td>2</td> <td>1</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem</td> <td>100026</td> <td>10000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Approval</td> <td>100000</td> <td>10000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Approval Description</td> <td>100000</td> <td>10000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension</td> <td>3</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Approval Type</td> <td>3</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Category</td> <td>2</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Deliverable</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Enumeration</td> <td>34</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Resolution</td> <td>18</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Dimension</td> <td>68</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Dimension Type</td> <td>8</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Hierarchy</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td> !WorkItem History</td> <td>242926</td> <td>20100</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem History Complex Custom Attribute</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Link</td> <td>112000</td> <td>10000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !WorkItem Type Mapping</td> <td>4</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong>RM</strong></td> <td> !CrossAppLink</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Custom Attribute</td> <td>422710</td> <td>51010</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Requirement</td> <td>422960</td> <td>51150</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Collection Requirement Lookup</td> <td>1110</td> <td>21000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Module Requirement Lookup</td> <td>22000</td> <td>2000</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Implemented BY</td> <td>100</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Request Affected</td> <td>5988</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Request Tracking</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>REQUICOL_TESTPLAN_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>REQUIREMENT_TESTCASE_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>REQUIREMENT_HIERARCHY</td> <td>12626</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>REQUIREMENT_EXTERNAL_LINK</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> !RequirementsHierarchyParent</td> <td>6184</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Attribute Define</td> <td>10</td> <td>10</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Requirement Link Type</td> <td>176</td> <td>176</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td>Requirement Type</td> <td>203</td> <td>203</td> </tr> </table> <table class="gray-table"> <tr> <th><strong>QM</strong></th> <th><strong>Record type</strong></th> <th></th> <th><strong>Initial load</strong></th> <th><strong>Delta load</strong></th> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestScript</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>BuildRecord</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Category</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>CategoryType</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Configuration</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>CustomAttribute</td> <td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>EWIRelaLookup</td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>CONFIG_EXECUTIONWORKITM_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECWORKITEM_REQUEST_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECWORKITEM_ITERATION_LOOKUP</td> <td>18000</td> <td>1800</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECWORKITEM_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ExecResRelaLookup</td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECRES_EXECWKITEM_LOOKUP</td> <td>54000</td> <td>5400</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECRES_REQUEST_LOOKUP</td> <td>6001</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECRESULT_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>EXECUTION_STEP_RESULT</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ExecStepResRequestLookup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ExecutionResult</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ExecutionStepResult</td><td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ExecutionWorkItem</td><td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Job</td><td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>JobResult</td><td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>KeyWord</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>KeyWordTestScriptLookup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>LabRequestChangeState</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>LabRequest</td><td></td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>LabResource</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Objective</td><td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Priority</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>RemoteScript</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Requiremen</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Reservation</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ReservationRequestLookup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>ResourceGroup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>State</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>StateGroup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestCase</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestCaseRelaLookup</td> <td></td><td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTCASE_RemoteTESTSCRIPT_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTCASE_TESTSCRIPT_LOOKUP</td> <td>6000</td> <td>600</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTCASE_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>16106</td> <td>1598</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUIREMENT_TESTCASE_LOOKUP</td> <td>6000</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUEST_TESTCASE_LOOKUP</td> <td>6000</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TestCase !RelatedRequest Lookup</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestPhase</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestPhaseExecDetail</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestPlan</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestPlanObjectiveStatus</td><td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestPlanRelaLookup</td> </td><td></td><td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUIREMENT_TESTPLAN_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSUITE_TESTPLAN_LOOKUP</td> <td>600</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTPLAN_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>2</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTPLAN_TESTCASE_LOOKUP</td> <td>6000</td> <td>600</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTPLAN_OBJECTIVE_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUIREMENT COLLECTION_TESTPLAN_LOOKUP</td> <td>32</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTPLAN_TESTPLAN_HIERARCHY</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTPLAN_ITERATION_LOOKUP</td> <td>120</td> <td>12</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUEST_TESTPLAN_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestScript</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestScriptRelaLookup _ Manual</td> <td></td><td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSCRIPT_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUEST_TESTSCRIPT_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestScriptRelaLookup _ Remote</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuiteElement</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuite</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuiteExecutionRecord</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuiteLog</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuiteRelaLookup</td><td></td><td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSUITE_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>1595</td> <td>155</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>REQUEST_TESTSUITE_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TestSuLogRelaLookup</td> <td></td><td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSUITE_TESTSUITELOG_LOOKUP</td> <td>3000</td> <td>300</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSUITELOG_EXECRESULT_LOOKUP</td> <td>21303</td> <td>2106</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td><td>TESTSUITELOG_CATEGORY_LOOKUP</td> <td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>TSERRelaLookup</td> <td></td><td>0</td> <td>0</td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td>Total</td> <td></td><td>144757</td> <td>12573</td> </tr> </table> N/A: Not applicable. ---++++!! For more information #ForMoreInformation * [[SizingReportCLM2012][Collaborative Lifecycle Management 2012 Sizing Report (Standard Topology E1)]] * RAID from wikipedia :[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID][RAID]] * Write Cache Policy from wikipedia : [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cache_%28computing%29#Writing_policies][Write Cache Policy]] ---++++!! About the authors Main.PengPengWang -------------------- ---+++++!! Questions and comments: * What other performance information would you like to see here? * Do you have performance scenarios to share? * Do you have scenarios that are not addressed in documentation? * Where are you having problems in performance? %COMMENT{type="below" target="PerformanceDatasheetReaderComments" button="Submit"}% %INCLUDE{"PerformanceDatasheetReaderComments"}% <sticky></div></sticky>
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rintable
|
V
iew topic
|
Backlinks:
We
b
,
A
l
l Webs
|
H
istory
: r12
<
r11
<
r10
<
r9
<
r8
|
M
ore topic actions
Deployment
Deployment web
Planning and design
Installing and upgrading
Migrating and evolving
Integrating
Administering
Monitoring
Troubleshooting
Community information and contribution guidelines
Create new topic
Topic list
Search
Advanced search
Notify
RSS
Atom
Changes
Statistics
Web preferences
NOTE: Please use the Sandbox web for testing
Status icon key:
To do
Under construction
New
Updated
Constant change
None - stable page
Smaller versions of status icons for inline text:
Copyright © by IBM and non-IBM contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use.
Please read the following
disclaimer
.
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more
here
.