Subscribe to Windows IT Pro
September 01, 1997 12:00 AM

Fibre Channel, SCSI and You

Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #179
Rating: (0)

For a more sophisticated test, we used BlueCurve's Dynameasure benchmarking tool to test the networks' performance. (For more information about this tool and the benchmarks we used, see Carlos Bernal, "Dynameasure Enterprise 1.5 by BlueCurve," page 81.) Because we were working with alpha and beta FC products, we kept our tests simple and used the SQL and File transfer benchmarks to look only at whether FC offers a performance advantage.

For the SQL benchmark, we used the Order Entry/Single Read/Write and Order Entry/Mixed Read/Write tests with a 96MB dataset. For the File benchmark, we used the Copy All Bi-directional benchmark, which copies a random mix of files; the file dataset size was 35.6MB. We used 20 client systems in a five-step test that simulated 20 to 100 users.

FC and SCSI-3 performed about the same in the SQL test, as you see in Table 1 . In the file transfer test, we found FC to be 10 percent to 20 percent faster than SCSI-3, as you see in Table 2. This result is much different from the 265 percent that you might expect. Of course, performance is subject to change with the final releases of the hardware components and software drivers.

So, why wasn't FC faster? Perhaps the hard drives couldn't spit out data fast enough, or the FC card in the server couldn't pump data into memory fast enough, or the CPUs couldn't take the data out of memory and dump it back to the FC card fast enough, or a combination of these factors. This situation is analogous to the difference between a 10Mbps and a 100Mbps Ethernet: The performance doesn't increase 10 times when you move from 10Mbps to a 100Mbps network, only about 2.5 times. The speed of the wire (the transfer rate) is only one of many factors that come into play when you interconnect equipment.

Today, FC can connect more devices and give you an extra bit of performance over SCSI-3, although you can approach FC's speed and connectivity by using multiple SCSI controllers. FC costs more now because it is new technology, but its costs are already coming down. If you need the fault tolerance of RAID, you can buy hardware-based SCSI RAID controllers, which are much faster than software-based RAID, thus making a multichannel SCSI solution a better solution than FC for many applications. But tomorrow will bring hardware-based FC RAID solutions and FC-to-SCSI converters. Then FC will be more attractive.

Additional Information
You can find more information about FC at the following locations:

Fibre Channel Association (FCA): http://www.amdahl.com/ext/CARP/FCA

Fibre Channel Systems Initiative (FCSI): http://www.amdahl.com/ext/CARP/FCA/FCSI.html

Fibre Channel Consortium: http://www.iol.unh.edu/consortiums/fc

Fibre Channel Loop Community: http://www.symbios.com/fclc

Ancor Communications: http://www.ancor.com/fcinfo.htm

American National Standards Institute (ANSI): http://www.ansi.org/docs/home.html

You can find more information about SCSI technologies at these locations:

ANSI X3T10 Subcommittee: http://www.symbios.com/x3t10

ANCOT: http://www.ancot.com

Contact Info:
Adaptec * 408-945-8600 or 800-442-7274
Web: http://www.adaptec.com
Email: sales@adaptec.com

Amdahl * 408-945-8600 or 800-442-7274
Web: http://www.amdahl.com

Emulex * 714-662-5600 or 800-854-7112
Web: http://www.emulex.com
Email: info@emulex.com

Raidtec * 770-664-6066
Web: http://www.raidtec.com
Email: raidtec@raidtec.com

Seagate Technology * 408-438-8111
Web: http://www.seagate.com

Related Content:

ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Gamma1
    8 years ago
    May 18, 2004

    All this shows is they are equal in these tests

  • Farshid
    8 years ago
    Mar 11, 2004

    Good aritcle....

  • Tarunesh Kumar
    8 years ago
    Feb 10, 2004

    Hi,
    On this site i really found informative comparision of different protocols. It is obvious that when we come to know that in ethernet after development speed enhanced from 10Mbps to 100 Mbps. Any one can realize that 900% speed increased. But this document really inform us what the actual scene is. Thanks to the compose.

  • Abe Hashemi
    10 years ago
    Jun 27, 2002

    Reading this article raises more questions in my mind than answers. Are these benchmarks bounded by I/O I/F bandwidth? A better comparison would be to attach more disks in FC case and use the connectivity advantage of FC over PSCSI, if the benchmark is I/O bound. Were all registry parameters set on NT to take advatage of the better bandwidth? Sound like more marketing than fair engineering comparison. Needs to describe the environment in more detail.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here

advertisement

advertisement

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.