Tag Archive for HCIBench

Comparing VM Encryption performance between ESXi 6.7U3 + vSAN and ESXi 7.0U2 + vSAN

This blog is similar to another I wrote which compared VM Encryption and vSAN encryption on ESXi 6.7U3. This time, I’m comparing VM Encryption performance on ESXi 6.7U3 and ESXi 7.0U2 running on vSAN.

What is the problem which needs to be solved?

I have posted this section before on the previous blog however it is important to understand the effect of an extra layer of encryption has on the performance of your systems. It has become a requirement (sometimes mandatory) for companies to enable protection of both personal identifiable information and data; including protecting other communications within and across environments New EU General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) are now a legal requirement for global companies to protect the personal identifiable information of all European Union residents. In the last year, the United Kingdom has left the EU, however the General Data Protection Regulations will still be important to implement. “The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS) requires encrypted card numbers. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Acts (HIPAA/HITECH) require encryption of Electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI).” (Townsendsecurity, 2019) Little is known about the effect encryption has on the performance of different data held on virtual infrastructure. VM encryption and vSAN encryption are the two data protection options I will evaluate for a better understanding of the functionality and performance effect on software defined storage.

It may be important to understand encryption functionality in order to match business and legal requirements. Certain regulations may need to be met which only specific encryption solutions can provide. Additionally, encryption adds a layer of functionality which is known to have an effect on system performance. With systems which scale into thousands, it is critical to understand what effect encryption will have on functionality and performance in large environments. It will also help when purchasing hardware which has been designed for specific environments to allow some headroom in the specification for the overhead of encryption

Testing Components

Test lab hardware (8 Servers)

HCIBench Test VMs

80 HCIBench Test VMs will be used for this test. I have placed 10 VMs on each of the 8 Dell R640 servers to provide a balanced configuration. No virtual machines other than the HCIBench test VMs will be run on this system to avoid interference with the testing.

The HCIBench appliance is running vdBench, not Fio

The specification of the 80 HCIBench Test VMs are as follows.

RAID Configuration

VM encryption will be tested on RAID1 and RAID6 vSAN storage

VM encryption RAID1 storage policy

Test ParametersConfiguration
vCenter Storage PolicyName = raid1_vsan_policy
Storage Type = vSAN
Failures to tolerate = 2 (RAID 1) Thin provisioned = Yes
Number of disk stripes per object = 2
Encryption enabled = Yes Deduplication and Compression enabled = No

VM encryption RAID6 storage policy

Test ParametersConfiguration
vCenter Storage PolicyName = raid6_vsan_policy
Storage Type = vSAN
Failures to tolerate = 2 (RAID6)
Thin provisioned = Yes
Number of disk stripes per object = 1
Encryption enabled = Yes Deduplication and Compression enabled = No

HCIBench Test Parameters

The test will run through various types of read/write workload at the different block sizes to replicate different types of applications using 1 and 2 threads.

  • 0% Read 100% Write
  • 20% Read 80% Write
  • 70% Read 30% Write

The block sizes used are

  • 4k
  • 16k
  • 64k
  • 128k

The test plan below containing 24 tests will be run for VM Encryption on 6.7U3 and again for VM Encryption on 7.0U2. These are all parameter files which are uploaded in HCIBench then can run sequentially without intervention through the test. I think I left these running for 3 days! It refreshes the cache in between tests.

Scroll across at the bottom to see the whole table

TestNumber of disksWorking Set %Number of threadsBlock size (k)Read %Write %Random %Test time (s)
12 (O/S and Data)100%14k01001007200
22 (O/S and Data)100%24k01001007200
32 (O/S and Data)100%14k20801007200
42 (O/S and Data)100%24k20801007200
52 (O/S and Data)100%14k70301007200
62 (O/S and Data)100%24k70301007200
72 (O/S and Data)100%116k01001007200
82 (O/S and Data)100%216k01001007200
92 (O/S and Data)100%116k20801007200
102 (O/S and Data)100%216k20801007200
112 (O/S and Data)100%116k70301007200
122 (O/S and Data)100%216k70301007200
132 (O/S and Data)100%164k01001007200
142 (O/S and Data)100%264k01001007200
152 (O/S and Data)100%164k20801007200
162 (O/S and Data)100%264k20801007200
172 (O/S and Data)100%164k70301007200
182 (O/S and Data)100%264k70301007200
192 (O/S and Data)100%1128k01001007200
202 (O/S and Data)100%2128k01001007200
212 (O/S and Data)100%1128k20801007200
222 (O/S and Data)100%2128k20801007200
232 (O/S and Data)100%1128k70301007200
242 (O/S and Data)100%2128k70301007200

HCIBench Performance Metrics

These metrics will be measured across all tests

Workload ParameterExplanationValue
IOPsIOPS measures the number of read and write operations per secondInput/Outputs per second
ThroughputThroughput measures the number of bits read or written per second Average IO size x IOPS = Throughput in MB/sMB/s
Read LatencyLatency is the response time when you send a small I/O to a storage device. If the I/O is a data read, latency is the time it takes for the data to come backms
Write LatencyLatency is the response time when you send a small I/O to a storage device. If the I/O is a write, latency is the time for the write acknowledgement to return.ms
Latency Standard DeviationStandard deviation is a measure of the amount of variation within a set of values. A low standard deviation indicates that the values tend to be close to the mean of the set, while a high standard deviation indicates that the values are spread out over a wider rangeValues must be compared to the standard deviation
Average ESXi CPU usageAverage ESXi Host CPU usage%
Average vSAN CPU usageAverage CPU use for vSAN traffic only%

Results

IOPs

IOPS measures the number of read and write operations per second. The pattern for the 3 different tests is consistent where the heavier write tests show the least IOPs gradually increasing in IOPs as the writes decrease.

IOPS and block size tend to have an inverse relationship. As the block size increases, it takes longer latency to read a single block, and therefore the number of IOPS decreases however, smaller block sizes yield higher IOPS

With RAID1 VM Encryption, 7.0U2 performs better than 6.7U3 at the lower block level – 4k and 16k but as we get into the larger 64k and 128k blocks, there is less of a difference with 6.7U3 having the slight edge over IOps performance.

With RAID6 VM Encryption, 7.0U2 has consistently higher IOPS across all tests than 6.7U3.

RAID6 VM Encryption produces less IOPs than RAID1 VM Encryption which is expected due to the increased overhead RAID6 incurs over RAID1 in general. RAID 1 results in 2 writes, one to each mirror. A RAID6 single write operation results in 3 reads and 3 writes (due to double parity) Each write operation requires the disks to read the data, read the first parity, read the second parity, write the data, write the first parity and then finally write the second parity.

RAID 1 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of IOPs between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID 1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID 6 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of IOPs between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Throughput

IOPs and throughput are closely related by the following equation.

Throughput (MB/s) = IOPS * Block size

IOPS measures the number of read and write operations per second, while throughput measures the number of bits read or written per second. The higher the throughput, the more data which can be transferred. The graphs follow a consistent pattern from the heavier to the lighter workload tests. I can see the larger block sizes such as 64K and 128K have the greater throughput in each of the workload tests than 4K or 8K. As the block sizes get larger in a workload, the number of IOPS will decrease. Even though it’s fewer IOPS, you’re getting more data throughput because the block sizes are bigger. The vSAN datastore is a native 4K system. It’s important to remember that storage systems may be optimized for different block sizes. It is often the operating system and applications which set the block sizes which then run on the underlying storage. It is important to test different block sizes on storage systems to see the effect these have.

With RAID1 VM Encryption at at lower block sizes, 4k and 16k, 7.0U2 performs better with greater throughput. At the higher block sizes 64k and 128k, there is less of a difference with 6.7U3 performing slightly better but the increase is minimal.

With RAID6 VM Encryption, there is generally a higher throughput at the lower block sizes but not at the higher block sizes

RAID1 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of throughput between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of throughput between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Average Latency

With RAID1 VM Encryption at at lower block sizes, 4k and 16k, 7.0U2 shows less latency but at the higher block sizes there is a slight increase in latency than 6.7U3

With RAID6 VM Encryption, the 7.0U2 tests are better showing less latency than the 6.7U3 tests

RAID1 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of average latency between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

The graph below shows the comparison of average latency between 6.7U3 and 7.0U2 with RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Read Latency

The pattern is consistent between the read/write workloads. As the workload decreases, read latency decreases although the figures are generally quite close. Read latency for all tests varies between 0.30 and 1.40ms which is under a generally recommended limit of 15-20ms before latency starts to cause performance problems.

RAID1 VM Encryption shows lower read latency for the 7.0U2 tests than 6.7U3. There are outlier values for the Read Latency across the 4K and 16K block size when testing 2 threads which may be something to note if applications will be used at these block sizes.

RAID6 shows a slightly better latency result than RAID1 however RAID6 has more disks than mirrored RAID1 disks to read from than RAID1 therefore the reads are very fast which is reflected in the results. Faster reads result in lower latency. Overall 7.0U2 performs better than 6.7U3 apart from one value at the 128k block size with 2 threads which may be an outlier.

RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Write Latency

The lowest write latency is 0.72ms and the largest is 9.56ms. Up to 20ms is the recommended value from VMware however with all flash arrays, thse values are expected and well within these limits. With NVMe and flash disks, the faster hardware may expose bottlenecks elsewhere in hardware stack and architecture which can be compared with internal VMware host layer monitoring. Write latency can occur at several virtualization layers and filters which each cause their own latency. The layers can be seen below.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-14.png

Latency can be caused by limits on the storage controller, queuing at the VMkernel layer, the disk IOPS limit being reached and the types of workloads being run possibly alongside other types of workloads which cause more processing.

With RAID1 Encryption, 7.0U2 performed better at the lower block size with less write latency than 6.7U3. However on the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k, 6.7U3 performs slightly better but we are talking 1-2ms.

With RAID6 VM Encryption, 7.0U2 performed well with less latency across all tests than 6.7U3.

As expected, all the RAID6 results incurred more write latency than the RAID1 results. Each RAID6 write operation requires the disks to read the data, read the first parity, read the second parity, write the data, write the first parity and then finally write the second parity producing a heavy write penalty and therefore more latency

RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Latency Standard Deviation

The standard deviation value in the testing results uses a 95th percentile. This is explained below with examples.

  • An average latency of 2ms and a 95th percentile of 6ms means that 95% of the IO were serviced under 6ms, and that would be a good result
  • An average latency of 2ms and a 95th percentile latency of 200ms means 95% of the IO were serviced under 200ms (keeping in mind that some will be higher than 200ms). This means that latencies are unpredictable and some may take a long time to complete. An operation could take less than 2ms, but every once in a while, it could take well over 200
  • Assuming a good average latency, it is typical to see the 95th percentile latency no more than 3 times the average latency.

With RAID1 Encryption, 7.0U2 performed better at the lower block size with less latency standard deviation than 6.7U3. However on the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k, 6.7U3 performs slightly better.

With RAID 6 VM Encryption, 7.0U2 performed with less standard deviation across all the tests.

RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

ESXi CPU Usage %

With RAID1 VM Encryption, at the lower block sizes, 4k and 16k, 7.0U2 uses more CPU but at the higher block sizes, 7.0U2 uses slightly less CPU usage.

With RAID6 VM Encryption, there is an increase in CPU usage across all 7.0U2 compared to 6.7U3 tests. RAID 6 has a higher computational penalty than RAID1.

RAID1 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

RAID6 VM Encryption

Click the graph for an enlarged view

Conclusion

The performance tests were designed to get an overall view from a low workload test of 30% Write, 70% Read through a series of increasing workload tests of 80% Write, 20% Read and 100% Write, 0% Read simulation. These tests used different block sizes to simulate different application block sizes. Testing was carried out on an all flash RAID1 and RAID6 vSAN datastore to compare the performance for VM encryption between ESXi 6.7U3 and 7.0U2. The environment was set up to vendor best practice across vSphere ESXi, vSAN, vCenter and the Dell server configuration.

RAID1 VM Encryption

  • With 6.7U3, IOPs at the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k can be slightly better than 7.0U2 but not at lower block sizes.
  • With 6.7U3, throughput at the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k can be slightly better than 7.0U2 but not at lower block sizes
  • Overall latency for 6.7U3 at the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k can be slightly better than 7.0U2 but not for the lower block size
  • Read latency for 6.7U3 is higher than 7.0U2.
  • Write latency at the higher block sizes, 64k and 128k can be slightly better than 7.0U2 but not for the lower block sizes.
  • There is more standard deviation for 6.7U3 then 7.0U2.
  • At the lower blocks sizes, 6.7U3 uses less CPU on the whole but at the higher block sizes, 7.0U2 uses less CPU

RAID6 VM Encryption

  • There are higher IOPs for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests.
  • There is generally a higher throughput for 7.0U2 at the lower block sizes, than 6.7U3 but not at the higher block sizes. However, the difference is minimal.
  • There is lower overall latency for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests
  • There is lower read latency for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests
  • There is lower write latency for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests
  • There is less standard deviation for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests
  • There is a higher CPU % usage for 7.0U2 than 6.7U3 across all tests

With newer processors, AES improvements, memory improvements, RDMA NICs and storage controller driver improvements, we may see further performance improvements in new server models.

Using HCIBench v1.6.3 to performance test vSAN 6.6

vSAN Load Testing Tool: HCIBench

*Note* HCIBench is now on v1.6.6 – Use this version.

VMware has a vSAN Stress and Load testing tool called HCIBench, which is provided via VMware’s fling capability. HCIbench can be run in versions 5.5 and upwards today as a replacement for the vSAN Proactive tests which are inbuilt into vSAN currently. I am running this against vSphere 6.5/vSAN 6.6 today. HCIBench provides more flexibility in defining a target performance profile as input and test results from HCIBench can be viewed in a web browser and saved to disk.

HCIBench will help simplify the stress testing task, as HCIBench asks you to specify your desired testing parameters (size of working set, IO profile, number of VMs and VMDKs, etc.) and then spawns multiple instances of Vdbench on multiple servers. If you don’t want to configure anything manually there is a button called Easyrun which will set everything for you. After the test run is done, it conveniently gathers all the results in one place for easy review and resets itself for the next test run.

HCIBench is not only a benchmark tool designed for vSAN, but also could be used to evaluate the performance of all kinds of Hyper-Converged Infrastructure Storage in vSphere environment.

Where can I can find HCI Bench?

There is a dedicated fling page which will provide access to HCIBench and its associated documentation. A zip file containing the Vdbench binaries from Oracle will also be required to be downloaded which can be done through the configuration page after the appliance is installed. You will need to register an account with Oracle to download this file but this doesn’t take long.

HCIBench Download: labs.vmware.com/flings/hcibench

HCIBench User Guidehttps://download3.vmware.com/software/vmw-tools/hcibench/HCIBench_User_Guide.pdf

Requirements

  • Web Browser: IE8+, Firefox or Chrome
  • vSphere 5.5 and later environments for both HCIBench and its client VMs deployment

HCIBench Tool Architecture

The tool is specifically designed for running performance tests using Vdbench against a vSAN datastore.
It is delivered in the form of Open Virtualization Appliance (OVA) that includes the following components:

The test Controller VM is installed with:

  • Ruby vSphere Console (RVC)
  • vSAN Observer
  • Automation bundle
  • Configuration files
  • Linux test VM template

The Controller VM has all the needed components installed. The core component is RVC (https://github.com/vmware/rvc) with some extended features enabled. RVC is the engine of this performance test tool, responsible for deploying Vdbench Guest VMs, conducting Vdbench runs, collecting results, and monitoring vSAN by using vSAN Observer.

VM Specification Controller VM

  • CPU: 8 vCPU
  • RAM: 4GB
  • OS VMDK: 16GB
  • Operating system: Photon OS 1.0
  • OS Credential: user is responsible for creating the root password when deploying the VM.
  • Software installed: Ruby 2.3.0, Rubygem 2.5.1, Rbvmomi 1.8.2, RVC 1.8.0, sshpass 1.05, Apache 2.4.18, Tomcat 8.54, JDK 1.8u102

Vdbench Guest VM

  • CPU: 4 vCPU
  • RAM: 4GB
  • OS VMDK: 16GB
  • OS: Photon OS 1.0
  • OS Credential: root/vdbench
  • Software installed: JDK 1.8u102, fio 2.13  SCSI Controller Type: VMware Paravirtual
  • Data VMDK: number and size to be defined by user

Pre-requisites

Before deploying this performance test tool packaged as OVA, make sure the environment meets the following requirements:

The vSAN Cluster is created and configured properly

  • The network for Vdbench Guest VMs is ready, and needs to have DHCP service enabled; if the network doesn’t have DHCP service, “Private Network” must be mapped to the same network when HCIBench being deployed.
  • The vSphere environment where the tool is deployed can access the vSAN Cluster environment to be tested
  • The tool can be deployed into any vSphere environment. However, we do not recommend deploying it into the vSAN Cluster that is tested to avoid unnecessary resource consumption by the tool.

What am I benchmarking?

This is my home lab which runs vSAN 6.6 on 3 x Dell Poweredge T710 servers each with

  • 2 x 6 core X5650 2.66Ghz processors
  • 128GB RAM
  • 6 x Dell Enterprise 2TB SATA 7.2k hot plug drives
  • 1 x Samsung 256GB SSD Enterprise 6.0Gbps
  • Perc 6i RAID BBWC battery-backed cache
  • iDRAC 6 Enterprise Remote Card
  • NetXtreme II 5709c Gigabit Ethernet NIC

Installation Instructions

  • Download the HCIBench OVA from https://labs.vmware.com/flings/hcibench and deploy it to your vSphere 5.5 or later environment.
  • Because the vApp option is used for deployment, HCIBench doesn’t support deployment on a standalone ESXi host, the ESXi host needs to be managed by a vCenter server.
  • When configuring the network, if you don’t have DHCP service on the VLAN that the VDBench client VMs will be deployed on, the “Private Network” needs to be mapped to the same VLAN because HCIBench will be able to provide the DHCP service.
  • Log into vCenter and go to File > Deploy OVF File

  • Name the machine and select a deployment location

  • Select where to run the deployed template. I’m going to run it on one of my host local datastores as it is recommended to run it in a location other than the vSAN.

  • Review the details

  • Accept the License Agreement

  • Select a storage location to store the files for the deployed template

  • Select a destination network for each source network
  • Map the “Public Network” to the network which the HCIBench will be
    accessed through; if the network prepared for Vdbench Guest VM doesn’t have DHCP service, map the “Private Network” to the same network, otherwise just ignore the “Private Network”.

  • Enter the network details. I have chosen static and filled in the detail as per below. I have a Windows DHCP Server on my network which will issue IP Addresses to the worker VMs.
  • Note: I added the IP Address of the HCIBench appliance into my DNS Server

  • Click Next and check all the details

  • The OVF should deploy. If you get a failure with the message. “The OVF failed to deploy. The ovf descriptor is not available” then redownload the OVA and try again and it should work.

  • Next power on the Controller VM and go to your web browser and navigate to your VM using http://<Your_HCIBench_IP>:8080. In my case http://192.168.1.116:8080. Your IP is the IP address you gave it during the OVF deployment or the DHCP address it picked up if you chose this option. If it asks you for a root password, it is normally what you set in the Deploy OVF wizard.
  • Log in with the root account details you set and you’ll get the Configuration UI

  • Go down the whole list and fill in each field. The screen-print shows half the configuration
  • Fill in the vCenter IP or FQDN
  • Fill in the vCenter Username as username@domain format
  • Fill in the Center Password
  • Fill in your Datacenter Name
  • Fill in your Cluster Name
  • Fill in the network name. If you don’t fill anything in here, it will assume the “VM Network” Note: This is my default network so I left it blank.
  • You’ll see a checkbox for enabling DHCP Service on the network. DHCP is required for all the Vdbench worker VMs that HCIBench will produce so if you don’t have DHCP on this network, you will need to check this box so it will assign addresses for you. As before I have a Windows DHCP server on my network so I won’t check this.

  • Next enter the Datastore name of the datastore you want HCIBench to test so for example I am going to put in vsanDatastore which is the name of my vSAN.
  • Select Clear Read/Write Cache Before Each Testing which will make sure that test results are not skewed by any data lurking in the cache. It is designed to flush the cache tier prior to testing.
  • Next you have the option to deploy the worker VMs directly to the hosts or whether HCIBench should leverage vCenter

If this parameter is unchecked, ignore the Hosts field below, for the Host Username/Password fields can also be ignored if Clear Read/Write Cache Before Each Testing is unchecked. In this mode, a Vdbench Guest VM is deployed by the vCenter and then is cloned to all hosts in the vSAN Cluster in a round-robin fashion. The naming convention of Vdbench Guest VMs deployed in this mode is
“vdbench-vc-<DATASTORE_NAME>-<#>”.
If this parameter is checked, all the other parameters except EASY RUN must be specified properly.
The Hosts parameter specifies IP addresses or FQDNs of hosts in the vSAN Cluster to have Vdbench Guest VMs deployed, and all these hosts should have the same username and password specifed in Host Username and Host Password. In this mode, Vdbench Guest VMs are deployed directly on the specified hosts concurrently. To reduce the network traffic, five hosts are running deployment at the same time then it moves to the next five hosts. Each host also deploys at an increment of five VMs at a time.

The naming convention of test VMs deployed in this mode is “vdbench-<HOSTNAME/IP>-<DATASTORE_NAME>-batch<VM#>-<VM#>”.

In general, it is recommended to check Deploy on Hosts for deployment of a large number of testVMs. However, if distributed switch portgroup is used as the client VM network, Deploy on Hosts must be unchecked.
EASY RUN is specifically designed for vSAN user, by checking this, HCIBench is able to handle all the configurations below by identifying the vSAN configuration. EASY RUN helps to decide how many client VMs should be deployed, the number and size of VMDKs of each VM, the way of preparing virtual disks before testing etc. The configurations below will be hidden if this option is checked.

  • You can omit all the host details and just click EASYRUN

  • Next Download the vDBench zip file and upload it as it is. Note: you will need to create yourself an Oracle account if you do not have one.

  • It should look like this. Click Upload

  • Click Save Configuration

  • Click Validate the Configuration.Note at the bottom, it is saying to “Deploy on hosts must be unchecked” when using fully automated DRS. As a result I changed my cluster DRS settings to partially automated and then I got the correct message below when I validated again.

  • If you get any issues, please look at the Pre-validation logs located here – /opt/automation/logs/prevalidation

  • Next we can start a Test. Click Test

  • You will see the VMs being deployed in vCenter

  • And more messages being shown

  • It should finish and say Test is finished

Results

  • Just as a note after the first test, it is worth checking that the Vms are spread evenly across all the hosts you are testing!
  • After the Vdbench testing finishes, the test results are collected from all Vdbench instances in the test VMs. And you can view the results at http://HCIBench_IP/results in a web browser and/or clicking the results button from the testing window.
  • You can also click Save Result and save a zip file of all the results
  • Click on the easy-run folder

  • Click on the .txt file

  • You will get a summarized results file

  • Just as a note in the output above, the 95th Percentile Latency can help the user to understand that during 95% of the testing time, the average latency is below 46.336ms
  • Click on the other folder

  • You can also see the individual vdBench VMs statistics by clicking on

  • You can also navigate down to what is a vSAN Observer collection. Click on the stats.html file to display a vSAN Observer view of the cluster for the period of time that the test was running

  • You will be able to click through the tabs to see what sort of performance, latency and throughput was occurring.

  • Enjoy and check you are getting the results you would expect from your storage
  • The results folder holds 200GB results so you may need to delete some results if it gets full. Putty into the appliance, go to /opt/output/results and you can use rm -Rf “filename”

Useful Links

  • Comments from the HCIBench fling site which may be useful for troubleshooting

https://labs.vmware.com/flings/hcibench/comments

  • If you have questions or need help with the tool, please email VSANperformance@vmware.com
  • Information about the back-end scripts in HCIBench thanks to Chen Wei

https://blogs.vmware.com/virtualblocks/2016/11/03/use-hcibench-like-pro-part-2/

An interesting point about VMs and O/S alignment – Do we still need this on vSAN and are there performance impacts?

https://blogs.vmware.com/vsphere/2014/08/virtual-san-block-alignment.html