Kevin Closson discusses SLOB Server CPU I/O Database Performance benchmarks

Slilly Little Oracle Benchmark (SLOB) Database Server I/O Podcast

server storage I/O trends

In this Server StorageIO podcast episode, I am joined by @Kevinclosson who is an Oracle (along with other Databases) performance expert and creator of the Silly Little Oracle Benchmark (SLOB) tool. Not surprising our data infrastructure discussion involves server CPU, software, I/O, storage, performance, software, tools, best practices, fundamental tradecraft skills among other items.

server storage I/O performance

Kevin has been involved in database performance (and porting) optimization for decades which means CPU server, memory, I/O and storage issues, resources and tuning. Part of server, storage I/O a tuning is understanding the workloads, also the demands of software such as databases along with how they use CPU and its impact on resources. This means that somewhere in the technology stack, server CPUs are still needed, even in serverless environments.

We also discuss metrics, gaining insight to resources uses, what they mean including how CPU wait may be costing your lost productivity with overhead, as well as benchmarks, simulations, and related themes. Check out Kevins website www.kevinclosson.net to learn more about Oracle, Databases, SLOB, tools and other content. Listen to the podcast discussion here (42 minutes) as well as on iTunes.

Where to learn more

Learn more about Oracle, Database Performance, Benchmarking along with other tools via the following links:

What this all means and wrap-up

Check out my discussion here with Kevin Closson where you may have some Dejavu, or learn something new on server, storage I/O, database performance, software, benchmark workloads as well as much more. Also available on 

Ok, nuff said for now…

Cheers
Gs

Greg Schulz – Microsoft MVP Cloud and Data Center Management, VMware vExpert (and vSAN). Author of Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials (CRC Press), as well as Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press), Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier) and twitter @storageio.

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2023 Server StorageIO(R) and UnlimitedIO All Rights Reserved

Part 4 – Which HDD for Content Applications – Database Workloads

Part 4 – Which HDD for Content Applications – Database Workloads

data base server storage I/O trends

Updated 1/23/2018
Which enterprise HDD to use with a content server platform for database workloads

Insight for effective server storage I/O decision making
Server StorageIO Lab Review

Which enterprise HDD to use for content servers

This is the fourth in a multi-part series (read part three here) based on a white paper hands-on lab report I did compliments of Servers Direct and Seagate that you can read in PDF form here. The focus is looking at the Servers Direct (www.serversdirect.com) converged Content Solution platforms with Seagate Enterprise Hard Disk Drive (HDD’s). In this post the focus expands to database application workloads that were run to test various HDD’s.

Database Reads/Writes

Transaction Processing Council (TPC) TPC-C like workloads were run against the SUT from the STI. These workloads simulated transactional, content management, meta-data and key-value processing. Microsoft SQL Server 2012 was configured and used with databases (each 470GB e.g. scale 6000) created and workload generated by virtual users via Dell Benchmark Factory (running on STI Windows 2012 R2).

A single SQL Server database instance (8) was used on the SUT, however unique databases were created for each HDD set being tested. Both the main database file (.mdf) and the log file (.ldf) were placed on the same drive set being tested, keep in mind the constraints mentioned above. As time was a constraint, database workloads were run concurrent (9) with each other except for the Enterprise 10K RAID 1 and RAID 10. Workload was run with two 10K HDD’s in a RAID 1 configuration, then another workload run with a four drive RAID 10. In a production environment, ideally the .mdf and .ldf would be placed on separate HDD’s and SSDs.

To improve cache buffering the SQL Server database instance memory could be increased from 16GB to a larger number that would yield higher TPS numbers. Keep in mind the objective was not to see how fast I could make the databases run, rather how the different drives handled the workload.

(Note 8) The SQL Server Tempdb was placed on a separate NVMe flash SSD, also the database instance memory size was set to 16GB which was shared by all databases and virtual users accessing it.

(Note 9) Each user step was run for 90 minutes with a 30 minute warm-up preamble to measure steady-state operation.

Users

TPCC Like TPS

Single Drive Cost per TPS

Drive Cost per TPS

Single Drive Cost / Per GB Raw Cap.

Cost / Per GB Usable (Protected) Cap.

Drive Cost (Multiple Drives)

Protect
Space Over head

Cost per usable GB per TPS

Resp. Time (Sec.)

ENT 15K R1

1

23.9

$24.94

$49.89

$0.99

$0.99

$1,190

100%

$49.89

0.01

ENT 10K R1

1

23.4

$37.38

$74.77

$0.49

$0.49

$1,750

100%

$74.77

0.01

ENT CAP R1

1

16.4

$24.26

$48.52

$0.20

$0.20

$ 798

100%

$48.52

0.03

ENT 10K R10

1

23.2

$37.70

$150.78

$0.49

$0.97

$3,500

100%

$150.78

0.07

ENT CAP SWR5

1

17.0

$23.45

$117.24

$0.20

$0.25

$1,995

20%

$117.24

0.02

ENT 15K R1

20

362.3

$1.64

$3.28

$0.99

$0.99

$1,190

100%

$3.28

0.02

ENT 10K R1

20

339.3

$2.58

$5.16

$0.49

$0.49

$1,750

100%

$5.16

0.01

ENT CAP R1

20

213.4

$1.87

$3.74

$0.20

$0.20

$ 798

100%

$3.74

0.06

ENT 10K R10

20

389.0

$2.25

$9.00

$0.49

$0.97

$3,500

100%

$9.00

0.02

ENT CAP SWR5

20

216.8

$1.84

$9.20

$0.20

$0.25

$1,995

20%

$9.20

0.06

ENT 15K R1

50

417.3

$1.43

$2.85

$0.99

$0.99

$1,190

100%

$2.85

0.08

ENT 10K R1

50

385.8

$2.27

$4.54

$0.49

$0.49

$1,750

100%

$4.54

0.09

ENT CAP R1

50

103.5

$3.85

$7.71

$0.20

$0.20

$ 798

100%

$7.71

0.45

ENT 10K R10

50

778.3

$1.12

$4.50

$0.49

$0.97

$3,500

100%

$4.50

0.03

ENT CAP SWR5

50

109.3

$3.65

$18.26

$0.20

$0.25

$1,995

20%

$18.26

0.42

ENT 15K R1

100

190.7

$3.12

$6.24

$0.99

$0.99

$1,190

100%

$6.24

0.49

ENT 10K R1

100

175.9

$4.98

$9.95

$0.49

$0.49

$1,750

100%

$9.95

0.53

ENT CAP R1

100

59.1

$6.76

$13.51

$0.20

$0.20

$ 798

100%

$13.51

1.66

ENT 10K R10

100

560.6

$1.56

$6.24

$0.49

$0.97

$3,500

100%

$6.24

0.14

ENT CAP SWR5

100

62.2

$6.42

$32.10

$0.20

$0.25

$1,995

20%

$32.10

1.57

Table-2 TPC-C workload results various number of users across different drive configurations

Figure-2 shows TPC-C TPS (red dashed line) workload scaling over various number of users (1, 20, 50, and 100) with peak TPS per drive shown. Also shown is the used space capacity (in green), with total raw storage capacity in blue cross hatch. Looking at the multiple metrics in context shows that the 600GB Enterprise 15K HDD with performance enhanced cache is a premium option as an alternative, or, to complement flash SSD solutions.

database TPCC transactional workloads
Figure-2 472GB Database TPS scaling along with cost per TPS and storage space used

In figure-2, the 1.8TB Enterprise 10K HDD with performance enhanced cache while not as fast as the 15K, provides a good balance of performance, space capacity and cost effectiveness. A good use for the 10K drives is where some amount of performance is needed as well as a large amount of storage space for less frequently accessed content.

A low cost, low performance option would be the 2TB Enterprise Capacity HDD’s that have a good cost per capacity, however lack the performance of the 15K and 10K drives with enhanced performance cache. A four drive RAID 10 along with a five drive software volume (Microsoft WIndows) are also shown. For apples to apples comparison look at costs vs. capacity including number of drives needed for a given level of performance.

Figure-3 is a variation of figure-2 showing TPC-C TPS (blue bar) and response time (red-dashed line) scaling across 1, 20, 50 and 100 users. Once again the Enterprise 15K with enhanced performance cache feature enabled has good performance in an apples to apples RAID 1 comparison.

Note that the best performance was with the four drive RAID 10 using 10K HDD’s Given popularity, a four drive RAID 10 configuration with the 10K drives was used. Not surprising the four 10K drives performed better than the RAID 1 15Ks. Also note using five drives in a software spanned volume provides a large amount of storage capacity and good performance however with a larger drive footprint.

database TPCC transactional workloads scaling
Figure-3 472GB Database TPS scaling along with response time (latency)

From a cost per space capacity perspective, the Enterprise Capacity drives have a good cost per GB. A hybrid solution for environment that do not need ultra-high performance would be to pair a small amount of flash SSD (10) (drives or PCIe cards), as well as the 10K and 15K performance enhanced drives with the Enterprise Capacity HDD (11) along with cache or tiering software.

(Note 10) Refer to Seagate 1200 12 Gbps Enterprise SAS SSD StorageIO lab review

(Note 11) Refer to Enterprise SSHD and Flash SSD Part of an Enterprise Tiered Storage Strategy

Where To Learn More

Additional learning experiences along with common questions (and answers), as well as tips can be found in Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials book.

Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials Book SDDC

What This All Means

If your environment is using applications that rely on databases, then test resources such as servers, storage, devices using tools that represent your environment. This means moving up the software and technology stack from basic storage I/O benchmark or workload generator tools such as Iometer among others instead using either your own application, or tools that can replay or generate various workloads that represent your environment.

Continue reading part five in this multi-part series here where the focus shifts to large and small file I/O processing workloads.

Ok, nuff said, for now.

Gs

Greg Schulz – Microsoft MVP Cloud and Data Center Management, VMware vExpert 2010-2017 (vSAN and vCloud). Author of Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials (CRC Press), as well as Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press), Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier) and twitter @storageio. Courteous comments are welcome for consideration. First published on https://storageioblog.com any reproduction in whole, in part, with changes to content, without source attribution under title or without permission is forbidden.

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO. All Rights Reserved. StorageIO is a registered Trade Mark (TM) of Server StorageIO.

HDDs evolve for Content Application servers

HDDs evolve for Content Application servers

hdds evolve server storage I/O trends

Updated 1/23/2018

Enterprise HDDs evolve for content server platform

Insight for effective server storage I/O decision making
Server StorageIO Lab Review

Which enterprise HDD to use for content servers

This is the seventh and final post in this multi-part series (read part six here) based on a white paper hands-on lab report I did compliments of Servers Direct and Seagate that you can read in PDF form here. The focus is looking at the Servers Direct (www.serversdirect.com) converged Content Solution platforms with Seagate Enterprise Hard Disk Drive (HDD’s). The focus of this post is comparing how HDD continue to evolve over various generations boosting performance as well as capacity and reliability. This also looks at how there is more to HDD performance than the traditional focus on Revolutions Per Minute (RPM) as a speed indicator.

Comparing Different Enterprise 10K And 15K HDD Generations

There is more to HDD performance than RPM speed of the device. RPM plays an important role, however there are other things that impact HDD performance. A common myth is that HDD’s have not improved on performance over the past several years with each successive generation. Table-10 shows a sampling of various generations of enterprise 10K and 15K HDD’s (14) including different form factors and how their performance continues to improve.

different 10K and 15K HDDs
Figure-9 10K and 15K HDD performance improvements

Figure-9 shows how performance continues to improve with 10K and 15K HDD’s with each new generation including those with enhanced cache features. The result is that with improvements in cache software within the drives, along with enhanced persistent non-volatile memory (NVM) and incremental mechanical drive improvements, both read and write performance continues to be enhanced.

Figure-9 puts into perspective the continued performance enhancements of HDD’s comparing various enterprise 10K and 15K devices. The workload is the same TPC-C tests used earlier in a similar (14) (with no RAID). 100 simulated users are shown in figure-9 accessing a database on each of the different drives all running concurrently. The older 15K 3.5” Cheetah and 2.5” Savio used had a capacity of 146GB which used a database scale factor of 1500 or 134GB. All other drives used a scale factor 3000 or 276GB. Figure-9 also highlights the improvements in both TPS performance as well as lower response time with new HDD’s including those with performance enhanced cache feature.

The workloads run are same as the TPC-C ones shown earlier, however these drives were not configured with any RAID. The TPC-C activity used Benchmark Factory with similar setup and configuration to those used earlier including on a multi-socket, multi-core Windows 2012 R2 server supporting a Microsoft SQL Server 2012 database with a database for each drive type.

ENT 10K V3 2.5"

ENT (Cheetah) 15K 3.5"

Users

1

20

50

100

Users

1

20

50

100

TPS (TPC-C)

14.8

50.9

30.3

39.9

TPS (TPC-C)

14.6

51.3

27.1

39.3

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.4

1.6

1.7

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.3

1.8

2.1

ENT 10K 2.5" (with cache)

ENT (Savio) 15K 2.5"

Users

1

20

50

100

Users

1

20

50

100

TPS (TPC-C)

19.2

146.3

72.6

71.0

TPS (TPC-C)

15.8

59.1

40.2

53.6

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.1

0.7

0.0

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.3

1.2

1.2

ENT 15K V4 2.5"

Users

1

20

50

100

TPS (TPC-C)

19.7

119.8

75.3

69.2

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.1

0.6

1.0

ENT 15K (enhanced cache) 2.5"

Users

1

20

50

100

TPS (TPC-C)

20.1

184.1

113.7

122.1

Resp. Time (Sec.)

0.0

0.1

0.4

0.2

Table-10 Continued Enterprise 10K and 15K HDD performance improvements

(Note 14) 10K and 15K generational comparisons were run on a separate comparable server to what was used for other test workloads. Workload configuration settings were the same as other database workloads including using Microsoft SQL Server 2012 on a Windows 2012 R2 system with Benchmark Factory driving the workload. Database memory sized was reduced however to only 8GB vs. 16GB used in other tests.

Where To Learn More

Additional learning experiences along with common questions (and answers), as well as tips can be found in Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials book.

Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials Book SDDC

What This All Means

A little bit of flash in the right place with applicable algorithms goes a long way, an example being the Seagate Enterprise HDD’s with enhanced cache feature. Likewise, HDD’s are very much alive complementing SSD and vice versa. For high-performance content application workloads flash SSD solutions including NVMe, 12Gbps SAS and 6Gbps SATA devices are cost effective solutions. HDD’s continue to be cost-effective data storage devices for both capacity, as well as environments that do not need the performance of flash SSD.

For some environments using a combination of flash and HDD’s complementing each other along with cache software can be a cost-effective solution. The previous workload examples provide insight for making cost-effective informed storage decisions.

Evaluate today’s HDD’s on their effective performance running workloads as close as similar to your own, or, actually try them out with your applications. Today there is more to HDD performance than just RPM speed, particular with the Seagate Enterprise Performance 10K and 15K HDD’s with enhanced caching feature.

However the Enterprise Performance 10K with enhanced cache feature provides a good balance of capacity, performance while being cost-effective. If you are using older 3.5” 15K or even previous generation 2.5” 15K RPM and “non-performance enhanced” HDD’s, take a look at how the newer generation HDD’s perform, looking beyond the RPM of the device.

Fast content applications need fast content and flexible content solution platforms such as those from Servers Direct and HDD’s from Seagate. Key to a successful content application deployment is having the flexibility to hardware define and software defined the platform to meet your needs. Just as there are many different types of content applications along with diverse environments, content solution platforms need to be flexible, scalable and robust, not to mention cost effective.

Ok, nuff said, for now.

Gs

Greg Schulz – Microsoft MVP Cloud and Data Center Management, VMware vExpert 2010-2017 (vSAN and vCloud). Author of Software Defined Data Infrastructure Essentials (CRC Press), as well as Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press), Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier) and twitter @storageio. Courteous comments are welcome for consideration. First published on https://storageioblog.com any reproduction in whole, in part, with changes to content, without source attribution under title or without permission is forbidden.

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO. All Rights Reserved. StorageIO is a registered Trade Mark (TM) of Server StorageIO.

VMware vCloud Air Server StorageIOlab Test Drive with videos

Server Storage I/O trends

VMware vCloud Air Server StorageIOlab Test Drive with videos

Recently I was invited by VMware vCloud Air to do a free hands-on test drive of their actual production environment. Some of you may already being using VMware vSphere, vRealize and other software defined data center (SDDC) aka Virtual Server Infrastructure (VSI) or Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) tools among others. Likewise some of you may already be using one of the many cloud compute or Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) such as Amazon Web Services (AWS) Elastic Cloud Compute (EC2), Centurylink, Google Cloud, IBM Softlayer, Microsoft Azure, Rackspace or Virtustream (being bought by EMC) among many others.

VMware vCloud Air provides a platform similar to those just mentioned among others for your applications and their underlying resource needs (compute, memory, storage, networking) to be fulfilled. In addition, it should not be a surprise that VMware vCloud Air shares many common themes, philosophies and user experiences with the traditional on-premises based VMware solutions you may be familiar with.

VMware vCloud Air overview

You can give VMware vCloud Air a trial for free while the offer lasts by clicking here (service details here). Basically if you click on the link and register a new account for using VMware vCloud Air they will give you up to $500 USD in service credits to use in the real production environment while the offer lasts which iirc is through end of June 2015.

Server StorageIO test drive VMware vCloud Air video I
Click on above image to view video part I

Server StorageIO test drive VMware vCloud Air part II
Click on above image to view video part II

What this means is that you can go and setup some servers with as many CPUs or cores, memory, Hard Disk Drive (HDD) or flash Solid State Devices (SSD) storage, external IP networks using various operating systems (Centos, Ubuntu, Windows 2008, 20012, 20012 R2) for free, or until you use up the service credits.

Speaking of which, let me give you a bit of a tip or hint, even though you can get free time, if you provision a fast server with lots of fast SSD storage and leave it sit idle over night or over a weekend, you will chew up your free credits rather fast. So the tip which should be common sense is if you are going to do some proof of concepts and then leave things alone for a while, power the virtual cloud servers off to stretch your credits further. On the other hand, if you have something that you want to run on a fast server with fast storage over a weekend or longer, give that a try, just pay attention to your resource usage and possible charges should you exhaust your service credits.

My Server StorageIO test drive mission objective

For my test drive, I created a new account by using the above link to get the service credits. Note that you can use your regular VMware account with vCloud Air, however you wont get the free service credits. So while it is a few minutes of extra work, the benefit was worth it vs. simply using my existing VMware account and racking up more cloud services charges on my credit card. As part of this Server StorageIOlab test drive, I created two companion videos part I here and part II here that you can view to follow along and get a better idea of how vCloud works.

VMware vCloud Air overview
Phase one, create the virtual data center, database server, client servers and first setup

My goal was to set up a simple Virtual Data Center (VDC) that would consist of five Windows 2012 R2 servers, one would be a MySQL database server with the other four being client application servers. You can download MySQL from here at Oracle as well as via other sources. For applications to simplify things I used Hammerdb as well as Benchmark Factory that is part of the Quest Toad tool set for database admins. You can download a free trial copy of Benchmark Factory here, and HammerDB here. Another tool that I used for monitoring the servers is Spotlight on Windows (SoW) which is also free here. Speaking of tools, here is a link to various server and storage I/O performance as well as monitoring tools.

Links to tools that I used for this test-drive included:

Setting up a virtual data center vdc
Phase one steps and activity summary

Summary of phase one of vdc
Recap of what was done in phase one, watch the associated video here.

After the initial setup (e.g. part I video here), the next step was to add some more virtual machines and take a closer look at the environment. Note that most of the work in setting up this environment was Windows, MySQL, Hammerdb, Benchmark Factory, Spotlight on Windows along with other common tools so their installation is not a focus in these videos or this post, perhaps a future post will dig into those in more depth.

Summary of phase two of the vdc
What was done during phase II (view the video here)

VMware vCloud Air vdc trest drive

There is much more to VMware vCloud Air and on their main site there are many useful links including overviews, how-too tutorials, product and service offering details and much more here. Besides paying attention to your resource usage and avoid being surprised by service charges, two other tips I can pass along that are also mentioned in the videos (here and here) is to pay attention what region you setup your virtual data centers in, second is have your network thought out ahead of time to streamline setting up the NAT and firewall as well as gateway configurations.

Where to learn more

Learn more about data protection and related topics, themes, trends, tools and technologies via the following links:

Server Storage I/O trends

What this all means and wrap-up

Overall I like the VMware vCloud Air service which if you are VMware centric focused will be a familiar cloud option including integration with vCloud Director and other tools you may already have in your environment. Even if you are not familiar with VMware vSphere and associated vRealize tools, the vCloud service is intuitive enough that you can be productive fairly quickly. On one hand vCloud Air does not have the extensive menu of service offerings to choose from such as with AWS, Google, Azure or others, however that also means a simpler menu of options to choose from and simplify things.

I had wanted to spend some time actually using vCloud and the offer to use some free service credits in the production environment made it worth making the time to actually setup some workloads and do some testing. Even if you are not a VMware focused environment, I would recommend giving VMware vCloud Air a test drive to see what it can do for you, as opposed to what you can do for it…

Ok, nuff said for now

Cheers
Gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press) and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier)
twitter @storageio

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO LLC All Rights Reserved

Collecting Transaction Per Minute from SQL Server and HammerDB

Storage I/O trends

Collecting Transaction Per Minute from SQL Server and HammerDB

When using benchmark or workload generation tools such as HammerDB I needed a way to capture and log performance activity metrics such as transactions per minute. For example using HammerDB to simulate an application making database requests performing various transactions as part of testing an overall system solution including server and storage I/O activity. This post takes a look at the problem or challenge I was looking to address, as well as creating a solution after spending time searching for one (still searching btw).

The Problem, Issue, Challenge, Opportunity and Need

The challenge is to collect application performance such as transactions per minute from a workload using a database. The workload or benchmark tool (in this case HammerDB) is the System Test Initiator (STI) that drives the activity (e.g. database requests) to a System Under Test (SUT). In this example the SUT is a Microsoft SQL Server running on a Windows 2012 R2 server. What I need is to collect and log into a file for later analysis the transaction rate per minute while the STI is generating a particular workload.

Server Storage I/O performance

Understanding the challenge and designing a strategy

If you have ever used benchmark or workload generation tools such as Quest Benchmark Factory (part of the Toad tools collection) you might be spoiled with how it can be used to not only generate the workload, as well as collect, process, present and even store the results for database workloads such as TPC simulations. In this situation, Transaction Processing Council (TPC) like workloads need to be run and metrics on performance collected. Lets leave Benchmark Factory for a future discussion and focus instead on a free tool called HammerDB and more specifically how to collection transactions per minute metrics from Microsoft SQL Server. While the focus is SQL Server, you can easily adapt the approach for MySQL among others, not to mention there are tools such as Sysbench, Aerospike among other tools.

The following image (created using my Livescribe Echo digital pen) outlines the problem, as well as sketches out a possible solution design. In the following figure, for my solution I’m going to show how to grab every minute for a given amount of time the count of transactions that have occurred. Later in the post processing (you could also do in the SQL Script) I take the new transaction count (which is cumulative) and subtract the earlier interval which yields the transactions per minute (see examples later in this post).

collect TPM metrics from SQL Server with hammerdb
The problem and challenge, a way to collect Transactions Per Minute (TPM)

Finding a solution

HammerDB displays results via its GUI, and perhaps there is a way or some trick to get it to log results to a file or some other means, however after searching the web, found that it was quicker to come up with solution. That solution was to decide how to collect and report the transactions per minute (or you could do by second or other interval) from Microsoft SQL Server. The solution was to find what performance counters and metrics are available from SQL Server, how to collect those and log them to a file for processing. What this means is a SQL Server script file would need to be created that ran in a loop collecting for a given amount of time at a specified interval. For example once a minute for several hours.

Taking action

The following is a script that I came up with that is far from optimal however it gets the job done and is a starting point for adding more capabilities or optimizations.

In the following example, set loopcount to some number of minutes to collect samples for. Note however that if you are running a workload test for eight (8) hours with a 30 minute ramp-up time, you would want to use a loopcount (e.g. number of minutes to collect for) of 480 + 30 + 10. The extra 10 minutes is to allow for some samples before the ramp and start of workload, as well as to give a pronounced end of test number of samples. Add or subtract however many minutes to collect for as needed, however keep this in mind, better to collect a few extra minutes vs. not have them and wished you did.

-- Note and disclaimer:
-- 
-- Use of this code sample is at your own risk with Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO LLC
-- assuming no responsibility for its use or consequences. You are free to use this as is
-- for non-commercial scenarios with no warranty implied. However feel free to enhance and
-- share those enhancements with others e.g. pay it forward.
-- 
DECLARE @cntr_value bigint;
DECLARE @loopcount bigint; # how many minutes to take samples for

set @loopcount = 240

SELECT @cntr_value = cntr_value
 FROM sys.dm_os_performance_counters
 WHERE counter_name = 'transactions/sec'
 AND object_name = 'MSSQL$DBIO:Databases'
 AND instance_name = 'tpcc' ; print @cntr_value;
 WAITFOR DELAY '00:00:01'
-- 
-- Start loop to collect TPM every minute
-- 

while @loopcount <> 0
begin
SELECT @cntr_value = cntr_value
 FROM sys.dm_os_performance_counters
 WHERE counter_name = 'transactions/sec'
 AND object_name = 'MSSQL$DBIO:Databases'
 AND instance_name = 'tpcc' ; print @cntr_value;
 WAITFOR DELAY '00:01:00'
 set @loopcount = @loopcount - 1
end
-- 
-- All done with loop, write out the last value
-- 
SELECT @cntr_value = cntr_value
 FROM sys.dm_os_performance_counters
 WHERE counter_name = 'transactions/sec'
 AND object_name = 'MSSQL$DBIO:Databases'
 AND instance_name = 'tpcc' ; print @cntr_value;
-- 
-- End of script
-- 

The above example has loopcount set to 240 for a 200 minute test with a 30 minute ramp and 10 extra minutes of samples. I use the a couple of the minutes to make sure that the system test initiator (STI) such as HammerDB is configured and ready to start executing transactions. You could also put this along with your HammerDB items into a script file for further automation, however I will leave that exercise up to you.

For those of you familiar with SQL and SQL Server you probably already see some things to improve or stylized or simply apply your own preference which is great, go for it. Also note that I’m only selecting a certain variable from the performance counters as there are many others which you can easily discovery with a couple of SQL commands (e.g. select and specify database instance and object name. Also note that the key is accessing the items in sys.dm_os_performance_counters of your SQL Server database instance.

The results

The output from the above is a list of cumulative numbers as shown below which you will need to post process (or add a calculation to the above script). Note that part of running the script is specifying an output file which I show later.

785
785
785
785
37142
1259026
2453479
3635138

Implementing the solution

You can setup the above script to run as part of a larger automation shell or batch script, however for simplicity I’m showing it here using Microsoft SQL Server Studio.

SQL Server script to collect TPM
Microsoft SQL Server Studio with script to collect Transaction Per Minute (TPM)

The following image shows how to specify an output file for the results to be logged to when using Microsoft SQL Studio to run the TPM collection script.

Specify SQL Server tpm output file
Microsoft SQL Server Studio specify output file

With the SQL Server script running to collect results, and HammerDB workload running to generate activity, the following shows Quest Spotlight on Windows (SoW) displaying WIndows Server 2012 R2 operating system level performance including CPU, memory, paging and other activity. Note that this example had about the system test initiator (STI) which is HammerDB and the system under test (SUT) that is Microsoft SQL Server on the same server.

Spotlight on Windows while SQL Server doing tpc
Quest Spotlight on Windows showing Windows Server performance activity

Results and post-processing

As part of post processing simple use your favorite tool or script or what I often do is pull the numbers into Excel spreadsheet, and simply create a new column of numbers that computes and shows the difference between each step (see below). While in Excel then I plot the numbers as needed which can also be done via a shell script and other plotting tools such as R.

In the following example, the results are imported into Excel (your favorite tool or script) where I then add a column (B) that simple computes the difference between the existing and earlier counter. For example in cell B2 = A2-A1, B3 = A3-A2 and so forth for the rest of the numbers in column A. I then plot the numbers in column B to show the transaction rates over time that can then be used for various things.

Hammerdb TPM results from SQL Server processed in Excel
Results processed in Excel and plotted

Note that in the above results that might seem too good to be true they are, these were cached results to show the tools and data collection process as opposed to the real work being done, at least for now…

Where to learn more

Here are some extra links to have a look at:

How to test your HDD, SSD or all flash array (AFA) storage fundamentals
Server and Storage I/O Benchmarking 101 for Smarties
Server and Storage I/O Benchmark Tools: Microsoft Diskspd (Part I)
The SSD Place (collection of flash and SSD resources)
Server and Storage I/O Benchmarking and Performance Resources
I/O, I/O how well do you know about good or bad server and storage I/Os?

What this all means and wrap-up

There are probably many ways to fine tune and optimize the above script, likewise there may even be some existing tool, plug-in, add-on module, or configuration setting that allows HammerDB to log the transaction activity rates to a file vs. simply showing on a screen. However for now, this is a work around that I have found for when needing to collect transaction activity performance data with HammerDB and SQL Server.

Ok, nuff said, for now…

Cheers gs

Greg Schulz – Author Cloud and Virtual Data Storage Networking (CRC Press), The Green and Virtual Data Center (CRC Press) and Resilient Storage Networks (Elsevier)
twitter @storageio

All Comments, (C) and (TM) belong to their owners/posters, Other content (C) Copyright 2006-2024 Server StorageIO and UnlimitedIO LLC All Rights Reserved