too bad
They don't seem to give any comparison points other than
"The NX6325 topped out at 38,673 TPS, while the previous record holder for a modern flash shared-storage solution came in at "only" 17,316 TPS."
So difficult to know just how fast it is. They give no indication(that I can see I didn't read word for word just browsed through the paragraphs of the site) of IOPS, or throughput actually achieved(they quote the specs of the system though).
Also seems the memory cache they used was way too low, 24GB ? 800GB DB and if you really care about performance memory is cheap I would bump it to at least 128GB. I imagine they set it low to stress the storage more, though I imagine not difficult to run a couple of tests with different configurations.
at my org 99% of OLTP MySQL DBs activity comes out of the buffer cache, main use for storage is for writing log files.
I remember our first DBA got hired and we built out first data center, I hooked a MySQL VM up to our small 3PAR array and he ran his benchmarks (sysbench I think ?? I don't recall). He was blown away by how fast everything was. I was blown away by how little disk I/O was actually being generated(maybe it was in the sub 200 IOPS range or something tiny). He was used to running very large databases(hundreds of them) at a very very large company, so I assumed he knew what he was doing (I sure as hell don't know how that benchmark works). In any case everything was fine when we went live that was all that mattered at the end of the day.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
