Compaq ProLiant 6000 Performance of Microsoft Exchange Server 5.0 on Compaq Pr - Page 11

Introduction

Get Compaq ProLiant 6000 PDF manuals and user guides View all Compaq ProLiant 6000 manuals
Add to My Manuals
Save this manual to your list of manuals

Page 11 highlights

ECG052.0897 WHITE PAPER (cont.) 1...1 PERFORMANCE RESULTS Introduction This section of the paper will focus on the performance of Microsoft Exchange Server in testing. Four main server resources will be addressed: • Processor subsystem -- all the server's CPU resource, whether a uniprocessor system or a multiprocessor system • Disk subsystem -- all the server's disk storage resource, including controller type and number of drives in a RAID set • System Memory -- all the server's memory resource, but not including cache memory on processor boards or drive arrays. This is the amount of RAM installed in the system • Network - the server's network connection and its capacity, performance and effect on Exchange Server response time The cardinal rule to remember is this: If a subsystem is not a bottleneck, then adding more of that resource will not increase capacity. In all likelihood, adding more of a non-bottlenecked resource will provide minimal improvements in response time, but not provide any additional system capacity. When analyzing the different resource areas of a server (CPU, memory, disk, and network), it is also important to understand the performance-versus-cost trade-offs involved. If the addition of a resource provides an incremental ten-percent performance benefit, the cost must be weighed against the total system cost and the overall importance of the performance benefit to your organization. The important consideration is whether or not the performance gain justifies the additional cost. Remember that costs can also come in the form of increased management and support overhead, system complexity, or more potential points of failure. An example of this with Microsoft Exchange is the question of adding a third processor. Exchange may benefit in response time to users by five to ten percent, but no additional system capacity (ability to handle more users) is achieved. In this case, it is unlikely that the additional cost for a processor is justified. Similarly, a large, high-end RISC-based system may provide performance gains of from five to ten percent, but may cost as much as 200% of the price of a Compaq ProLiant server. Again, the question is: Does the possible performance benefit justify the cost premium?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
W
HITE
P
APER
(cont.)
11
ECG052.0897
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
P
ERFORMANCE
R
ESULTS
Introduction
This section of the paper will focus on the performance of Microsoft Exchange Server in testing.
Four main server resources will be addressed:
•
Processor subsystem -- all the server’s CPU resource, whether a uniprocessor system or a
multiprocessor system
•
Disk subsystem -- all the server’s disk storage resource, including controller type and number
of drives in a RAID set
•
System Memory -- all the server’s memory resource, but not including cache memory on
processor boards or drive arrays. This is the amount of RAM installed in the system
•
Network – the server’s network connection and its capacity, performance and effect on
Exchange Server response time
The cardinal rule to remember is this:
If a subsystem is not a bottleneck, then adding more of
that resource will not increase capacity
. In all likelihood, adding more of a non-bottlenecked
resource will provide minimal improvements in response time, but not provide any additional
system capacity.
When analyzing the different resource areas of a server (CPU, memory, disk, and network), it is
also important to understand the performance-versus-cost trade-offs involved. If the addition of a
resource provides an incremental ten-percent performance benefit, the cost must be weighed
against the total system cost and the overall importance of the performance benefit to your
organization. The important consideration is whether or not the performance gain justifies the
additional cost.
Remember that costs can also come in the form of increased management and support overhead,
system complexity, or more potential points of failure. An example of this with Microsoft
Exchange is the question of adding a third processor. Exchange may benefit in response time to
users by five to ten percent, but no additional system capacity (ability to handle more users) is
achieved. In this case, it is unlikely that the additional cost for a processor is justified. Similarly, a
large, high-end RISC-based system may provide performance gains of from five to ten percent,
but may cost as much as 200% of the price of a Compaq ProLiant server. Again, the question is:
Does the possible performance benefit justify the cost premium?