Condusiv Technologies Blog

Condusiv Technologies Blog

Blogging @Condusiv

The Condusiv blog shares insight into the issues surrounding system and application performance—and how I/O optimization software is breaking new ground in solving those issues.

Financial Sector Battered by Rising Compliance Costs

by Dawn Richcreek 15. August 2018 08:39

Finance is already an outlier in terms of IT costs. The industry devotes 10.5% of total revenue to IT—and on average, each financial industry IT staffer supports only 15.7 users, the fewest of any industry.

All over the world, financial services companies are facing skyrocketing compliance costs. Almost half the respondents to a recent Accenture survey of compliance officers in 13 countries said they expected 10% to 20% increases, and nearly one in five are expecting increases of more than 20%.

Much of this is driven by international banking regulations. At the beginning of this year, the Common Reporting Standard went into effect. An anti-tax-evasion measure signed by 142 countries, the CRS requires financial institutions to provide detailed account information to the home governments of virtually every sizeable depositor.

Just to keep things exciting, the U.S. government hasn’t signed on to CRS; instead we require banks doing business with Americans to comply with the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2010. Which requires—surprise, surprise—pretty much the same thing as CRS, but reported differently.

And these are just two examples of the compliance burden the financial sector must deal with. Efficiently, and within a budget. In a recent interview by ValueWalk entitled “Compliance Costs Soaring for Financial Institutions,” Condusiv® CEO Jim D’Arezzo said, “Financial firms must find a path to more sustainable compliance costs.”

Speaking to the site’s audience (ValueWalk is a site focused on hedge funds, large asset managers, and value investing) D’Arezzo noted that finance is already an outlier in terms of IT costs. The industry devotes 10.5% of total revenue to IT, more than government, healthcare, retail, or anybody else. It’s also an outlier in terms of IT staff load; on average, each financial industry IT staffer supports only 15.7 users, the fewest of any industry. (Government averages 37.8 users per IT staff employee.)

To ease these difficulties, D’Arezzo recommends that the financial industry consider advanced technologies that provide cost-effective ways to enhance overall system performance. “The only way financial services companies will be able to meet the compliance demands being placed on them, and at the same time meet their efficiency and profitability targets, will be to improve the efficiency of their existing capacity—especially as regards I/O reduction.”

At Condusiv, that’s our business. We’ve seen users of our I/O reduction software solutions increase the capability of their storage and servers, including SQL servers, by 30% to 50% or more. In some cases, we’ve seen results as high as 10X initial performance—without the need to purchase a single box of new hardware.

If you’re interested in working with a firm that can reduce your two biggest silent killers of SQL performance, request a demo with an I/O performance specialist now.

 

For an explanation of why your heaviest workloads are only processing half the throughput they should from VM to storage, view this short video.

 

A Deep Dive Into The I/O Performance Dashboard

by Howard Butler 2. August 2018 08:36

While most users are familiar with the main Diskeeper®/V-locity®/SSDkeeper™ Dashboard view which focuses on the number of I/Os eliminated and Storage I/O Time Saved, the I/O Performance Dashboard tab takes a deeper look into the performance characteristics of I/O activity.  The data shown here is similar in nature to other Windows performance monitoring utilities and provides a wealth of data on I/O traffic streams. 

By default, the information displayed is from the time the product was installed. You can easily filter this down to a different time frame by clicking on the “Since Installation” picklist and choosing a different time frame such as Last 24 Hours, Last 7 Days, Last 30 Days, Last 60 Days, Last 90 Days, or Last 180 Days.  The data displayed will automatically be updated to reflect the time frame selected.

 

The first section of the display above is labeled as “I/O Performance Metrics” and you will see values that represent Average, Minimum, and Maximum values for I/Os Per Second (IOPS), throughput measured in Megabytes per Second (MB/Sec) and application I/O Latency measured in milliseconds (msecs). Diskeeper, V-locity and SSDkeeper use the Windows high performance system counters to gather this data and it is measured down to the microsecond (1/1,000,000 second).

While most people are familiar with IOPS and throughput expressed in MB/Sec, I will give a short description just to make sure. 

IOPS is the number of I/Os completed in 1 second of time.  This is a measurement of both read and write I/O operations.  MB/Sec is a measurement that reflects the amount of data being worked on and passed through the system.  Taken together they represent speed and throughput efficiency.  One thing I want to point out is that the Latency value shown in the above report is not measured at the storage device, but instead is a much more accurate reflection of I/O response time at an application level.  This is where the rubber meets the road.  Each I/O that passes through the Windows storage driver has a start and completion time stamp.  The difference between these two values measures the real-world elapsed time for how long it takes an I/O to complete and be handed back to the application for further processing.  Measurements at the storage device do not account for network, host, and hypervisor congestion.  Therefore, our Latency value is a much more meaningful value than typical hardware counters for I/O response time or latency.  In this display, we also provide meaningful data on the percentage of I/O traffic- which are reads and which are writes.  This helps to better gauge which of our technologies (IntelliMemory® or IntelliWrite®) is likely to provide the greatest benefit.

The next section of the display measures the “Total Workload” in terms of the amount of data accessed for both reads and writes as well as any data satisfied from cache. 

 

A system which has higher workloads as compared to other systems in your environment are the ones that likely have higher I/O traffic and tend to cause more of the I/O blender effect when connected to a shared SAN storage or virtualized environment and are prime candidates for the extra I/O capacity relief that Diskeeper, V-locity and SSDkeeper provide.

Now moving into the third section of the display labeled as “Memory Usage” we see some measurements that represent the Total Memory in the system and the total amount of I/O data that has been satisfied from the IntelliMemory cache.  The purpose of our patented read caching technology is twofold.  Satisfy from cache the frequently repetitive read data requests and be aware of the small read operations that tend to cause excessive “noise” in the I/O stream to storage and satisfy them from the cache.  So, it’s not uncommon to see the “Data Satisfied from Cache” compared to the “Total Workload” to be a bit lower than other types of caching algorithms.  Storage arrays tend to do quite well when handed large sequential I/O traffic but choke when small random reads and writes are part of the mix.  Eliminating I/O traffic from going to storage is what it’s all about.  The fewer I/Os to storage, the faster and more data your applications will be able to access.

In addition, we show the average, minimum, and maximum values for free memory used by the cache.  For each of these values, the corresponding Total Free Memory in Cache for the system is shown (Total Free Memory is memory used by the cache plus memory reported by the system as free).  The memory values will be displayed in a yellow color font if the size of the cache is being severely restricted due to the current memory demands of other applications and preventing our product from providing maximum I/O benefit.  The memory values will be displayed in red if the Total Memory is less than 3GB.

Read I/O traffic, which is potentially cacheable, can receive an additional benefit by adding more DRAM for the cache and allowing the IntelliMemory caching technology to satisfy a greater amount of that read I/O traffic at the speed of DRAM (10-15 times faster than SSD), offloading it away from the slower back-end storage. This would have the effect of further reducing average storage I/O latency and saving even more storage I/O time.

Additional Note: For machines running SQL Server or Microsoft Exchange, you will likely need to cap the amount of memory that those applications can use (if you haven’t done so already), to prevent them from ‘stealing’ any additional memory that you add to those machines.

It should be noted the IntelliMemory read cache is dynamic and self-learning.  This means you do not need to pre-allocate a fixed amount of memory to the cache or run some pre-assessment tool or discovery utility to determine what should be loaded into cache.  IntelliMemory will only use memory that is otherwise, free, available, or unused memory for its cache and will always leave plenty of memory untouched (1.5GB – 4GB depending on the total system memory) and available for Windows and other applications to use.  As there is a demand for memory, IntelliMemory will release memory from it’s cache and give this memory back to Windows so there will not be a memory shortage.  There is further intelligence with the IntelliMemory caching technology to know in real time precisely what data should be in cache at any moment in time and the relative importance of the entries already in the cache.  The goal is to ensure that the data maintained in the cache results in the maximum benefit possible to reduce Read I/O traffic. 

So, there you have it.  I hope this deeper dive explanation provides better clarity to the benefit and internal workings of Diskeeper, V-locity and SSDkeeper as it relates to I/O performance and memory management.

You can download a free 30-day, fully functioning trial of our software and see the new dashboard here: www.condusiv.com/try

Condusiv Launches SSDkeeper Software that Guarantees “Faster than New” Performance for PCs and Physical Servers and Extends Longevity of SSDs

by Brian Morin 17. January 2017 09:30

The company that sold over 100 Million Diskeeper® licenses for hard disk drive systems, now releases SSDkeeper™ to keep solid-state drive systems running longer while performing “faster than new.”

Every Windows PC or physical server fitted with a solid-state drive (SSD) suffers from very small, fractured writes and reads, which dampen optimal SSD performance and ultimately erodes the longevity of SSDs from write amplification issues. SSDkeeper’s patented software ensures large, clean contiguous writes and reads for more payload with every I/O operation, reduced Program/Erase (P/E) cycles that shorten SSD longevity, and boosts performance even further with its ability to cache hot reads within idle, available DRAM.

Solid-state drives can only handle a number of finite writes before failing. Every write kicks off P/E cycles that shorten SSD lifespan otherwise known as write amplification. By reducing the number of writes required for any given file or workload, SSDkeeper significantly boosts write performance speed while also reducing the number of P/E cycles that would have otherwise been executed. This enables individuals and organizations to reclaim the write speed of their SSD drives while ensuring the longest life possible.

Patented Write Optimization

SSDkeeper’s patented write optimization engine (IntelliWrite®) prevents excessively small, fragmented writes and reads that rob the performance and endurance of SSDs. SSDkeeper ensures large, clean contiguous writes from Windows, so maximum payload is carried with every I/O operation. By eliminating the “death by a thousand cuts” scenario of many, tiny writes and reads that slow system performance, the lifespan of an SSD is also extended due to reduction in write amplification issues that plague all SSD devices.

Patented Read Optimization

SSDkeeper electrifies Windows system performance further with an additional patented feature - dynamic memory caching (IntelliMemory®). By automatically using idle, available DRAM to serve hot reads, data is served from memory which is 12-15X faster than SSD and further reduces wear to the SSD device. The real genius in SSDkeeper’s DRAM caching engine is that nothing has to be allocated for cache. All caching occurs automatically. SSDkeeper dynamically uses only the memory that is available at any given moment and throttles according to the need of the application, so there is never an issue of resource contention or memory starvation. If a system is ever memory constrained at any point, SSDkeeper's caching engine will back off entirely. However, systems with just 4GB of available DRAM commonly serve 50% of read traffic. It doesn't take much available memory to have a big impact on performance.

Enhanced Reporting

If you ever wanted to know how much Windows inefficiencies were robbing system performance, SSDkeeper tracks time saved due to elimination of small, fragmented writes and time saved from every read request that is served from DRAM instead of being served from the underlying SSD. Users can leverage SSDkeeper’s built-in dashboard to see what percentage of all write requests are reduced by sequentializing otherwise small, fractured writes and what percentage of all read requests are cached from idle, available DRAM.

SSDkeeper is a lightweight file system driver that runs invisibly in the background with near-zero intrusion on system resources. All optimizations occur automatically in real-time.

While SSDkeeper provides the same core patented functionality and features as the latest Diskeeper® 16 for hard disk drives (minus defragmentation functions for hard disk drives only), the benefit to a solid-state drive is different than to a hard disk drive. Hard disk drives do not suffer from write amplification that reduces longevity. By eliminating excessively small writes, IntelliWrite goes beyond improved write performance but extends endurance as well.

Available in Professional and Server Editions

>SSDkeeper Professional for Windows PCs with SSD drives greatly enhances the performance of corporate laptops and desktops.

>SSDkeeper Server speeds physical server system performance of the most I/O intensive applications such as MS-SQL Server by 2X to 10X depending on the amount of idle, unused memory.  

>Options include Diskeeper Administrator management console to automate network deployment and management across hundreds or thousands of PCs or servers.  

>A free 30-day software trial download is available at http://www.condusiv.com/evaluation-software/

>Now available for purchase on our online store:  http://www.condusiv.com/purchase/SSDKeeper/

 

Overview of How We Derive Storage I/O Time Saved

by Rick Cadruvi, Chief Architect 11. January 2017 01:00

The latest versions of V-locity® (for virtual servers) and Diskeeper® (for physical servers and PCs) both contain built-in dashboards that show the exact benefit of the product to any one system or group of systems by showing how much and what percentage of read/write traffic is offloaded from storage and how much “I/O Time” that saves.

To understand the computation on “I/O Time Saved,” in its simplest form, the formula is essentially:

       Storage I/O Time Saved = Total I/Os Eliminated * Average I/O Response Time

In essence, if you take Total I/Os Eliminated from the dashboard Benefits screen and multiply it times the average latency from the I/O Performance dashboard screen, you will generally end up in the ballpark of the “I/O Time Saved.”

I/O counts and I/O times are accumulated on a per I/O basis. Every I/O that goes to storage is timed using Windows High Performance Counters for accuracy.  That timing is from when the I/O is sent down the stack until it comes back up. In essence we time I/O response time (IORT) or latency that the application sees, not the storage device.  We also track reads and writes separately as they impact the storage “I/O Time Saved” differently.

The data is accumulated and calculated during periods of time rather than across the entire reporting period. In the long term, that period of time ends up being hourly. Very active I/O periods will have longer IORTs and therefore the amount of I/O storage time saved per I/O eliminated will likely be greater than during relatively light periods. 

If there is a high queue depth, the IORT we time will be larger than the per I/O storage IORT.  We look at the effective IORT the application would see rather than the time the underlying storage takes to process any single I/O.  After all, the user only cares about how long the application took to process an I/O he/she requested, not how long a HDD or SSD took for any single I/O when it got around to processing it.

Let’s talk for a moment about storage “I/O Time Saved” versus clock time because they are not the same and our technologies can, in some cases, save far more storage I/O time than clock time.

If all storage I/O was sequential for the entire instance of the operating system, then the maximum amount of storage “I/O Time Saved” would be the amount of time since installation, and you would expect it to be considerably less as we are unlikely to eliminate ALL I/Os. And you might expect some idle time. Of course, applications do not do pure sequential I/O.  Modern applications are almost always multi-threaded and most computer systems are running multiple applications or instances of them at the same time.  Also, other operations are happening on the system outside of the primary application.  Think of Outlook running in the background while you do some other work on your system. Outlook is constantly receiving updated data.  Windows is also processing lots of I/Os in the background just for it to be able to continue operations.  These I/Os happen in parallel to any I/Os that users may be doing with an application.

In general, there are lots of I/Os that are being processed at the same time.  You would not want to work on a computer system where only a single I/O was being processed at any one point in time as it would be VERY slow.  If the average queue depth would have been 5 without us but 2 with us, that means every time 2 I/Os go through to storage, we would have eliminated 3 I/Os.  The end result would be a storage “I/O Time Saved” of somewhere between 1.5-3x clock time, depending on how the underlying storage processed the I/Os. 

Another factor that contributes to the possibility of storage “I/O Time Saved” exceeding of clock time is the reduction of split I/Os.  Let’s say that without our product all I/Os actually end up being split into 3 I/Os due to Windows writing files in an excessively small, fragmented manner.  After installing our product, by displacing small, tiny writes with large, contiguous writes, each of those I/Os that had to be split into 3 are now being completed as a single I/O.  If that was the normal case, the storage “I/O Time Saved” for each I/O would be roughly 2x the actual storage I/O time due to prevention of fragmentation.

Everything You Need to Know about SSDs and Fragmentation in 5 Minutes

by Howard Butler 17. November 2016 05:42

When reading articles, blogs, and forums posted by well-respected (or at least well intentioned people) on the subject of fragmentation and SSDs, many make statements about how (1) SSDs don’t fragment, or (2) there’s no moving parts, so no problem, or (3) an SSD is so fast, why bother? We all know and agree SSDs shouldn’t be “defragmented” since that shortens lifespan, so is there a problem after all?

The truth of the matter is that applications running on Windows do not talk directly to the storage device.  Data is referenced as an abstracted layer of logical clusters rather than physical track/sectors or specific NAND-flash memory cells.  Before a storage unit (HDD or SSD) can be recognized by Windows, a file system must be prepared for the volume.  This takes place when the volume is formatted and in most cases is set with a 4KB cluster size.  The cluster size is the smallest unit of space that can be allocated.  Too large of a cluster size results in wasted space due to over allocation for the actual data needed.  Too small of a cluster size causes many file extents or fragments.  After formatting is complete and when a volume is first written to, most all of the free space is in just one or two very large sections.  Over the course of time as files of various sizes are written, modified, re-written, copied, and deleted, the size of individual sections of free space as seen from the NTFS logical file system point of view becomes smaller and smaller.  I have seen both HDD and SSD storage devices with over 3 million free space extents.  Since Windows lacks file size intelligence when writing a file, it never chooses the best allocation at the logical layer, only the next available – even if the next available is 4KB. That means 128K worth of data could wind up with 32 extents or fragments, each being 4KB in size. Therefore SSDs do fragment at the logical Windows NTFS file system level.  This happens not as a function of the storage media, but of the design of the file system.

Let’s examine how this impacts performance.  Each extent of a file requires its own separate I/O request. In the example above, that means 32 I/O operations for a file that could have taken a single I/O if Windows was smarter about managing free space and finding the best logical clusters instead of the next available. Since I/O takes a measurable amount of time to complete, the issue we’re talking about here related to SSDs has to do with an I/O overhead issue.

Even with no moving parts and multi-channel I/O capability, the more I/O requests needed to complete a given workload, the longer it is going to take your SSD to access the data.  This performance loss occurs on initial file creation and carries forward with each subsequent read of the same data.  But wait… the performance loss doesn’t stop there.  Once data is written to a memory cell on an SSD and later the file space is marked for deletion, it must first be erased before new data can be written to that memory cell.  This is a rather time consuming process and individual memory cells cannot be individually erased, but instead a group of adjacent memory cells (referred to as a page) are processed together.  Unfortunately, some of those memory cells may still contain valuable data and this information must first be copied to a different set of memory cells before the memory cell page (group of memory cells) can be erased and made ready to accept the new data.  This is known as Write Amplification.  This is one of the reasons why writes are so much slower than reads on an SSD.  Another unique problem associated with SSDs is that each memory cell has a limited number of times that a memory cell can be written to before that memory cell is no longer usable.  When too many memory cells are considered invalid the whole unit becomes unusable.  While TRIM, wear leveling technologies, and garbage collection routines have been developed to help with this behavior, they are not able to run in real-time and therefore are only playing catch-up instead of being focused on the kind of preventative measures that are needed the most.  In fact, these advanced technologies offered by SSD manufacturers (and within Windows) do not prevent or reverse the effects of file and free space fragmentation at the NTFS file system level.

The only way to eliminate this surplus of small, tiny writes and reads that (1) chew up performance and (2) shorten lifespan from all the wear and tear is by taking a preventative approach that makes Windows “smarter” about how it writes files and manages free space, so more payload is delivered with every I/O operation. That’s exactly why more users run Condusiv’s Diskeeper® (for physical servers and workstations) or V-locity® (for virtual servers) on systems with SSD storage. For anyone who questions how much value this approach adds to their systems, the easiest way to find out is by downloading a free 30-day trial and watch the “time saved” dashboard for yourself. Since the fastest I/O is the one you don’t have to write, Condusiv software understands exactly how much time is saved by eliminating multiple, fractured writes with fewer, larger contiguous writes. It even has an additional feature to cache reads from idle, available DRAM (15X faster than SSD), which further offloads I/O bandwidth to SSD storage. Especially for businesses with many users accessing a multitude of applications across hundreds or thousands of servers, the time savings are enormous.

 

ATTO Benchmark Results with and without Diskeeper 16 running on a 120GB Samsung SSD Pro 840. The read data caching shows a 10X improvement in read performance.

RecentComments

Comment RSS

Month List

Calendar

<<  August 2018  >>
MoTuWeThFrSaSu
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
3456789

View posts in large calendar