1. Testing… Testing… 1, 2, 3.x... Performance Testing of Pi on NT George Krc Mead Paper

2. What are we trying to do?

3. PI 3 Performance Testing n What are we trying to find out? –Is Pi 3 on NT suitable for gauging data applications? –How does DEC Alpha compare with Intel hardware running Windows NT? –How big a box do we need? –How much network bandwidth will be used?

4. Test Configurations n Configuration #1: “Prioris” –Digital Prioris 6200 MX Server Dual Pentium Pro 200MHz Processors 128mB RAM 10gb Hard Disk Fast-wide SCSI controller PCI 10/100mb Ethernet Carrd

5. Test Configurations n Configuration #2: “Alpha” –Digital AlphaStation 600 5/266 Single Alpha 266MHz Processor 128mB RAM 10gb Hard Disk Fast-wide SCSI controller PCI 10/100mb Ethernet Carrd

6. Test Configurations n Configuration #3: “Dell” –Dell PowerEdge 6100 Server Four Pentium Pro 200MHz Processors 256mB RAM 10gb Hard Disk Fast-wide SCSI controller PCI 10/100mb Ethernet Carrd

7. Test Conditions n Pi Interface on Separate NT API node n Duplicate data sent to test systems n Gauging systems scans every 30 seconds n Data transmission for 15 seconds n Typical data rates in 30 seconds –6633 snapshot events –6236 archive events –26 archive posts

8. More Test Conditions n Pi version used was 3.1, Build 2.81 n CPU usage for four Pi modules (PISnapSS, PiNetMgr, PiArchss, PiBaseSS) n Statistics gathered with NT Perf. Monitor n Data gathered over 500 seconds intervals n Total CPU usage measured across multiple processors

9. Test #1 n Compare the CPU Utilization of the Alpha and Prioris Servers under normal data gathering conditions

10. CPU Utilization Pi Data Gathering

11. Test #1 Inferences n Prioris outperformed the Alpha by about 2:1 on equal processor speed basis n Testing in production environments can be erratic

12. Test #2 n Compare the CPU Utilization of the Alpha and Prioris servers and Profile client response time under two conditions: –One Sensor, 250 Scans, 480 Boxes, 30 second wait –Three Sensors, 250 Scans, 480 Boxes, 60 second wait

13. CPU Utilization With Client Profile Access

16. Response Time Client Profile Access

17. Test #2 Inferences n A single client increases Alpha utilization by a factor of 2:1 n Multiple profile continues to increase utilization, but by less than a factor of 2:1 n CPU utilization advantages on the Prioris give better user response times n The Alpha could support 8 continuous profiles, the Prioris about 15

18. Test #3 n Compare the despooling capabilities of the Alpha and Prioris servers

19. Despooling Test One Hour of Data (2300 records)

20. Test #3 Inferences n The Alpha despools significantly faster than the Prioris n The Prioris is limited by I/O throughput

21. Test #4 n Compare the CPU Utilization of the Dell and Prioris Servers under normal data gathering conditions

22. CPU Utilization Pi Data Gathering

23. Test #4 Inferences n The Dell matches the Prioris on a per- processor basis n The Dell maintains a 2:1 performance ratio n The application scales well to a quad processor system n The Dell gives much better performance of the snapshot subsystem (extra memory???)

24. Test #5 n Compare the CPU Utilization of the Dell and Prioris servers and Profile client response time under two conditions: –One Sensor, 250 Scans, 480 Boxes, 30 second wait –Three Sensors, 250 Scans, 480 Boxes, 60 second wait

25. CPU Utilization With Client Profile Access

26. Test #5 Inferences n The Dell demonstrates a better than 2:1 performance increase over the Prioris with twice the processors n The CPU utilization reduction does not translate to a lower response time to the client application n The Dell could support up to 60 continuous profile client accesses

27. Test #6 n Determine Network Loading under 4 conditions –No Pi Activity –Data Gathering Only –60 Second Client Profile Access –30 Second Client Profile Access

28. Network Utilization

29. Test #6 Inferences n Data gathering does not put a significant loading on the network n Client access puts an extremely high loading on the network n 100mb ethernet will be required for the client application

30. SO WHAT???? –Pi 3 on Windows NT is suitable for gauging data –Both Alpha and Intel are suitable, but the Intel architecture is more cost-effective –The minimum reasonable configuration is a dual Pentium Pro, 200 MHz system with 256 mB RAM and a 100mb ethernet card

31. AND... –A reasonable limit for the Pi tag count is 10,000 tags –10mb ethernet is insufficient for the application –Pi 3.1 Build 2.81 had a few bugs