Transcript HP-UX 11.21 Project Box

Sun’s weak points
in UE10000
Sun’s Weak Points in UE10000
• DSD/DR is Not used by Customers
• Sun will not provide DSD reference sites [Giga].
• Regular system administrator can not do the DSD/DR changes, it takes very skilled
system administrator to handle the DSD/DR changes [Giga].
• Very few customers use DSD/DR in database related production environment.
DRS/DR are used more often in testing environment [Giga].
• Few customers use DSDs. Those who do say it works fine most of the time.
[Gartner].
• Quality Problems
• Terrible problems with USII last year [unable to do root cause analysis]. Some
customers won’t return to Sun, but will stay in Sun fold with Fujistu [Giga].
• E Cache problem does not only bring down the affected domain, it brings the whole
UE10K down.
• Sun has been having great difficulty to design reliable Enterprise level servers. Due
to their background as a workstation vendor they are behind in “design for reliability”
technology.
• The UltraSPARC II based systems did not have ECC in cache memory with all the
reliability problems as a result. The USIII now supports ECC in level-2 cache, but
they are still behind as they have no chip-kill technology or DMR.
• No Virtual Partitions
• No Goal based and Multi System Workload Management
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 2
SINGLE POINTS OF FAILURE
(SPOF)
HP has the lowest SPOF failure rate: The SPOF failure rate between
partitions in Superdome (called the 'infrastructure failure rate') is
lower than the infrastructure failure rate of S390 Lpars and
certainly much lower than SUN UE10K domains
How can this be??? when SUN quotes that the UE10K has
“Complete Hardware Redundancy”?
SUN’s definition on SPOF: Looking carefully at the literature,
“Complete Hardware Redundancy” means: A fully redundant
system will always recover from a system crash, by using
(booting from) standby hardware. Therefore, this “complete
hardware redundancy” is really a collection of ‘single points of
failure’ by HP’s definition (the one the customer cares about).
Source: Ken Pomaranski, Hardware HA Architect
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 3
Does Sun really understand reliability?
Isn’t reliability
about
‘keeping
systems
running?’
How then
does Sun
track server
reliability?
Shouldn’t the
UE10K then
never fail?
• From UE10K RAS manual:
• “Sun has made the time required for a module replacement
much shorter [over time]. This enhancements coupled with
improved diagnostic capabilities have reduced the cycle time on
systems, simultaneously increasing reliability and availability. “
• There is currently no industry adopted means to measure MTBF.
Therefore, comparisons between vendors is of questionable
use.
• “Each UE10K can be configured to have 100% HW redundancy”
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 4
Sun’s Customers Understand!
• Topping their list of complaints are the frequency of server crashes caused by
the problem [memory], fixes that don't work and Sun's tendency to initially
blame the problem on other factors before acknowledging it - often only under a
nondisclosure agreement. – Computer World – 9/04/2000
• "They treated the whole thing like a cover-up“, said one user at a large utility in
the Western U.S. who asked not to be named. – Computer World – 9/04/00
• “The long-standing nature of the problem and Sun's handling of the issue raise
troubling questions about the quality of Sun's hardware and support” – Gartner
group
• Engineers have long known that memory chips can be disrupted by radiation
and other environmental factors. That is why Hewlett-Packard and IBM use
error-correcting code, or ECC, which detects cache errors and restores bits that
were changed by mistake. – Forbes 11/13/2000
• Sun servers lack ECC protection. "Frankly, we just missed it. It's something we
regret at this point," Shoemaker [Sun executive VP] says. – Forbes 11/13/2000
What else have they ‘missed’??
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 5
Sun’s UE10K Dynamic
Reconfiguration Weaknesses
Sun’s UE10K implementation of DR is not quite as dynamic as SUN would have
you believe. It’s a marketing tale!!!
• Hot swapping I/O requires that CPU and memory also be brought down.
• Any DR activity requires that the database be shut down, therefore making applications unavailable
during the process.
• DR cannot be used in combination with memory interleaving across system boards which reduces
maximum performance. Sun customers have to choose between good system performance or
DR functionality, but cannot get both at the same time!
• DR is not supported in combination with SunCluster fail-over. Since during a DR operation the
system halts, SunCluster considers this system to be failing and starts a fail-over procedure to
another system. Sun customers have to choose between a true multi-system, high availability
solution and the use of DR, but cannot get both at the same time!
• DR conflicts with Intimate Shared Memory (ISM) used by demanding applications.
To improve performance, most memory intensive applications, like databases, make use of the
Intimate Shared Memory (ISM) capability in the E10000. Most applications using ISM do not allow
dynamic addition or removal of their shared memory allocation. Using memory intensive
applications with ISM (like large databases) and making the most efficient use of partitions
prevent the use of DR.
• Deactivating/moving a system board with full memory can take 15 minutes (backup and rearrange
memory contents). All activities in the affected partitions(s) have to be paused during that
time! (To compensate Sun introduced TurboDR boards with just CPU’s, no memory...)
Source: John Wiltschut, BSTO Marketing
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 6
Why Sun is
being defensive:
Superdome
vs.
E10000
Sun blames HP and IBM for copying the E10000
The truth is:
• Superdome is more original than the E10000
has ever been:
the E10K is an exact copy of the Cray CS6400
• Sun is just playing catch-up with the E10000’s inferior performance,
reliability and functionality
• The E10000 is an end-of-line product based on
old technology and without future expansion capabilities
• Superdome is built as an advanced architecture based on the latest
technology and with a very strong growth potential
• Sun has never developed a high-end server by themselves.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 8
The E10000 is COPIED by Sun (from
Cray)
• The CS6400 was developed by Cray and
announced in 1993.
• It supported up to 64 SuperSPARC
processors (60 MHz) and ran CRS-OS,
based on Solaris, but modified by Cray.
• Most of the CS6400 used less than 30
CPU’s as it did not scale very well.
• In 1996 Sun purchased this technology
from Cray/SGI and introduced a copy in
1997 under the name E10000.
• All basic technology was already present
in the CS6400 and Sun has never added
any break-through improvements
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 9
64 SMP CPUs in
Single Cabinet
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 1993
The reality:
• The Cray CS6400 (announced in
1993) was not developed by Sun,
ran CRS-OS and had very limited
scalability.
• The E10K is a copy of the CS6400
without significant breakthrough
technology added by Sun.
• HP Superdome supports 64
CPU’s in a single system with
SMP functionality.
• Superdome is built as an
advanced architecture based on
the latest technology and with a
very strong growth potential. The
modular packaging allows you to
use only half the size up to 32
processors.
• SD has 3 base cabinet configurations. The E10K comes in full
size, even with only a few CPUs.
• A 48-CPU Superdome delivers
71% more performance* in a
system that is only 20% wider
than a 64-CPU E10000.
* based on TPC benchmark 11.21Partitions
with Oracle
Review
4/5/2001
Page 10
Full Dynamic
Partitioning
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 1997
The reality:
• Sun still does not support “full” dynamic
partitioning (it does not support dynamic
control by applications). Dynamic System
Domains (DSD) require operator
intervention and usually a reboot.
• The use of DSD has many limitations:
it cannot be combined with memory
interleaving, SunCluster fail-over or
Intimate Shared Memory*. Domains always
have to be multiples of 4 CPU’s.
• HP is the first vendor to
provide the full spectrum of
partitioning: Hyperplex,
nPartitions, virtual partitions
and automatic resource
partitioning. The different
levels of partitioning can be
combined as desired.
• nPartitions can be added
and removed within an
active Superdome.
• Virtual Partitions are
dynamic at the CPU level,
not just the cell level.
* see whitepaper DSD and DR 11.21Partitions
-- the trueReview
story
4/5/2001
Page 11
only hp offers the full spectrum of partitioning
isolation
hard partitions with
multiple nodes
hyperplex
– complete
hardware
and software
isolation
– multiple OS
images
...Sun
can’t
match
flexibility
hard partitions
within a node
virtual partitions
within hard partitions
nPartitions
– hardware
isolation per cell
– complete
software
isolation
– multiple OS
images
dynamic system
suncluster
domains (dsd)
• no high• require reboot in
speed
most situations
interconnect
•difficult to modify
• 8 node max.
configuration
•doesn’t work (sun experts are
with sun’s dr
usually needed)
virtual
partitions
– software
isolation
– multiple OS
images
resource partitions
prm
(Process Resource Mgr)
hp-ux wlm
(Workload Manager)
– dynamic
resource allocation
– automatic goalbased resource
allocation via
set slo’s
– 1 OS image
solaris resource
manager (srm)
• expensive
•doesn’t manage i/o
•not goal-based like
hp-ux
wlm
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 12
Automated DR* /
Hot-swap CPU +
Memory
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 2000/1997
The reality:
• Automated DR is nothing more than
scripting of an otherwise manual cell
board replacement process. Dynamic
Reconfiguration (DR) has many
limitations (similar to DSD’s**)
• If a processor fails then the domain
crashes and a reboot is required. This
is neither automatic nor dynamic.
• HP-UX can dynamically
deallocate processors and
memory with DPR and DMR
(dynamic processor and
memory resilience) in case of
failures. This is a fully
automatic process.
• Cell boards can be added and
removed in an active
Superdome.
• HP has been using error
checking and correcting in
cache memory to prevent most
processor and system failures.
Sun hasn’t in the US II.
* DR = Dynamic Reconfiguration
** see whitepaper DSD and DR11.21Partitions
-- the true
story
Review
4/5/2001
Page 13
Interdomain
Networking
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 1999
The reality:
• Interdomain networking (IDN) uses shared
memory and the connected domains are
not isolated from failures in the other
domains. As IDN violates hardware
isolation (the main reason for partitioning)
it increases the risk of down-time.
• Sun does not support high-speed
interconnect like Hyperfabric for highbandwidth data transfer between nodes
and partitions.
• HP supports other
high-speed
communication links
like Hyperfabric,
Fibre-Channel etc.,
and recommends not
to use IDN because of
the lack of isolation
between partitions.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 14
Clustered File
Systems
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 2000 (December)
The reality:
• This was promised for SunCluster 3.0 but
was never delivered (confirmed during the
press conference). Sun tries to get around
it by using marketing terms like ‘clusteraware file system’ and ‘cluster file service’.
• Sun’s clustering solutions have always
been behind and customers have always
preferred other solutions. Even now
SunCluster 3.0 only support 8 nodes and is
focused on Solaris only.
• HP supports multiple file
system options depending
on customer needs.
CIFS/9000 is a global file
system supporting multiplatform, multi-OS file
systems.
• MC/ServiceGuard provides
a superior , mature solution
with support up to 16
nodes, hundreds of
applications and has more
than 45,000+ installations.
Hyperplex supports
hundred of clustered nodes.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 15
Global Network
Services
Sun claims:
• Supported with Solaris
since 2000 (December)
The reality:
• This is mainly about abstracting an IP
service from a network interface, such
that applications can be moved in a
cluster (HA fail-over). To speak in Sun
terms: nothing new...
• HP ‘s MC/ServiceGuard
already provides flexible
IP addresses so that
applications can fail-over
to other nodes in a cluster
without any problem.
• HP is focused on
supporting multi-platform,
multi-OS environments
based on customer
demand.
• Sun is focused on Solaris-only
solutions with no support for multi-OS.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 16
Sun’s systems are lagging in all these areas
What Sun does not say...
Reliability
– Sun’s current systems do not have Error Checking and Correcting, Dynamic
Processor and Memory Resilience or Chip-Kill technology.
– Analysts and press have reported serious problems with Sun E10000
systems at customer sites. See the Forbes and Gartner articles.
Performance
– The US II processor lacks performance compared to current HP’s
offerings, resulting in much lower system performance. Even the US III will
barely meet the current PA-RISC performance levels.
I/O
bandwidth
– Today’s applications like broadband and datawarehousing requires high
I/O bandwidths, which Sun does not deliver.
Investment
protection
– Current Sun products are basically end-of-life. The US III requires new
boxes and runs only the Solaris 8 OS.
Multi-platform
support
– Sun’s vision is limited to Solaris/SPARC only;
Not towards multi-platform environments.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 17
Who is really playing Catch-Up?
Fea tures
ECC in
ca che
DPR a nd
DM R
Virtua l
Pa rtitions
2 5 6 GB
RAM
1 9 2 I/ O
slots
Built-in
IA-6 4
rea diness
N ot
offered
N ot
offered
N ot
offered
Utility
pricing
TCE
N ot
offered
N ot
offered
HP
1Q01
Sun
N ot
offered
N ot
offered
N ot
offered
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 18
leadership performance, flexibility, availability
performance/
scalability
CPU
memory
I/O
tpm
hp superdome
sun e10000
64
256
192
64
64/128
64
200K+
115K/156K
flexibility
hyperplex
nPartitions
virtual partitions
resource partitions
utility pricing
iCOD
IA-64
Multi-OS
availability
multi-system
single system
leadership
limited
weakness
investment protection
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 19
Page 19
Sun’s Dark Secret
Sun Screen
Sun Microsystems’ servers
have been crashing for
more than a year. Sun has
kept the flaw secret--and
hasn’t yet fixed it
11/13/2000
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 20
Sun and HP
Reliability
Comparisons
Why HP can fulfill the customer
needs better than Sun
HP understands what available systems really mean. Availability is
the BASE upon which all other features are built:
Event Mgmt
Multi-system HA
Nothing matters without this!
Flexible Compute Management
Virtual Partitions
Hard Partitions
High Quality / Resilient Hardware (Hardware that keeps running)
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 22
Reliability Comparison
CPU
MEMORY
IO
BACKPLANE
HP
UE10K
SUNFIRE
Internal cache
error correction
YES
NO
NO
Dynamic
processor
resilience
YES
SOME
SOME
Chip kill protection
YES
YES
NO
HW scrubbing
YES
NO
NO
Dynamic memory
resilience
YES
NO
NO
PCI bus error
isolation
YES
NO
NO
Full PCI OLAR
YES
NO
NO
Address bus ECC
YES
NO
NO
Redundant DC /
DC converters
YES
NO
NO
Full stuck-at bit
correction
YES
NO
NO
Interconnect
reliability
experience
YES
NO
NO
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 23
Reliability Comparison (2)
SOLUTION
LEVEL
HP
UE10K
SUNFIRE
5 nines solution
availability
YES
NO
NO
Data center wide
HA solutions
YES
NO
NO
Customer care for
quality issues
YES (*)
NO
NO
Proven domain
isolation
YES
NO
NO
Solution level
verification
YES
?
?
‘Cosmic ray’
tolerance
YES
NO
NO
HP projects that the above reliability ‘oversights’ result in SUN systems with 2-4x greater failure
rates than HP systems. This has been proven by field experience.
(*) Rather than blame customers for quality problems, HP closely tracks field data and works
PROACTIVELY to fix potential field quality problems.
11.21Partitions Review
4/5/2001
Page 24