Greetings to all!
In this topic, I will talk about our real transition process from the HP EVA P6300 system to the new storage system, describe our expectations and what was received from them and what wasn’t. In the text, the system selection process will be very brief, although the selection process took up a LOT of time. I do not provide any IOPS data in order not to start a cockfighting controversy. This is not the purpose of the article. I just describe my real experience.

Briefly about the Company

We are engaged in wholesale and retail trade in tools, a federal network has been built across the country, and the Central Office is in the Far East. Database - 1C 8.2 UPP, several databases of 300-500 GB, all working. All branches work in a single database. The average number of people working simultaneously in the bases is from 300 to 500 people.

What happened

In 2011, I built a storage system based on the FC 8Gb protocol, consisting of 2 Brocade 8/24 switches, HP DL servers with HBA 82Q, HP ML2024 tape library for backup storage and the HP EVA P6300 storage system itself, mainly DB 1C.
Composition EVA: 1 shelf, 25 SAS SFF 300 Gb 15K disks. Constructed vRAID-groups 1 and 5 levels for different (in order of importance) data.
')
During the work of 1C in December 2012, there was a periodic degradation of 1C performance, which stopped the work of retail outlets and the business processes of the company as a whole.
The analysis carried out in December 2012 - January 2013 showed that the disk subsystem is the bottleneck in the system.

Solution options

So, a bottleneck is found. There were 3 solutions: increase the number of disks by purchasing additional shelves for EVA, switch to SSD or buy storage at a higher level.
The transfer of active (most frequently used data) to SSDs in the current EVA has not been seriously considered, since EVA did not support (and will not) data tiering, and the size of the bases, considering their setting in vRAID-1, made such a solution simply insanely expensive.
When using just the second shelf, we did not receive a qualitative increase in performance when investing a fairly considerable amount (more than 1.1 million rubles per shelf with 25 300 gb 15K disks).
Therefore, I informed the management of the company that a cardinal solution needs replacing the disk array. Having received approval and the maximum amount that can be spent (“but better less”), the selection process began.

Decision choice (short)

Since we are based in the Far East, vendors were initially recalled, not represented by authorized SOs and representative offices further than Novosibirsk, and for which there were many complaints about the service. For this reason, NetApp, HDS, etc. were not considered at all. HP remained in the shortlist (despite their vague positions at the time in the storage segment), IBM with their Storwize and EMC. Mandatory conditions were:
1. Availability of data tiering or similar functions (transfer of frequently used data to faster disks and vice versa)
2. SSD support
3. FC 8Gb Interface
4. Possibility to expand further
The following data was taken as the base configuration - 40 SAS 15K +8 SSD 200Gb disks.
Local integrators gave the first sentences: EMC VNX 5300 and IBM Storwize 7100. Standard trading began and the configuration file, conditions, etc.
And then, going as usual once a month to HP, I saw a description of the new 3PAR line, positioned as a middle-cost solution. Requested information. Local integrators learned about this equipment from me :), respectively, could not say the details. The HP website is more advertising (“more-higher-faster, but no one will say”) than a technical one; there was almost nothing on this product at that time (January 2013, I will remind you).
I contacted HP DV-representation, received brochures, materials a bit more detailed. But in the Russian office of HP, they refused to give a potent piece of iron, because they are not yet in Russia and expensive :).
By that time, it became clear that Storwize for the price does not go into the budget, IBM is very reluctant and has been moving in price for a long time.
EMC (after they had “accidentally” voiced the 3PAR version) instead of VNX5300, it offered a little more than VNX5500. It was a serious bid to win. Suddenly, HP said that it was ready to set off the value of the existing and guaranteed EVA for 3PAR, while leaving EVA with us. This made the decision cheaper at 18-22 kilobax more attractive.

As a result, the HP 3PAR option was chosen in the following round:

1 QR483A 4A HP 3PAR StoreServ 7400 2-N Storage Base
20 QR492A 4A HP M6710 300GB 6G SAS 15K 2.5in HDD
20 QR492A 0D1 4A Factory integrated
4 QR503A 4A HP M6710 200GB 6G SAS 2.5in SLC SSD
4 QR503A 0D1 4A Factory integrated
1 BC795A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Reporting Suite LTU
1 BC795A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
1 BC773A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 OS Suite Base LTU
1 BC773A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
48 BC774A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 OS Suite Drive LTU
48 BC774A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
1 BC781A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Virtual Copy Base LTU
1 BC781A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
48 BC782A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Virtual Copy Drive LTU
48 BC782A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
1 BC787A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Adaptive Opt Base LTU
1 BC787A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
48 BC788A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Adaptive Opt Drive LTU
48 BC788A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
1 BC785A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Dynamic Opt Base LTU
1 BC785A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
48 BC786A 43 HP 3PAR 7400 Dynamic Opt Drive LTU
48 BC786A 0D1 43 Factory integrated
1 QR490A 4A HP M6710 2.5in 2U SAS Drive Enclosure
20 QR492A 4A HP M6710 300GB 6G SAS 15K 2.5in HDD
20 QR492A 0D1 4A Factory integrated
4 QR503A 4A HP M6710 200GB 6G SAS 2.5in SLC SSD
4 QR503A 0D1 4A Factory integrated
1 HA110A3 72 HP 3y Support Plus 24 SVC
1 HA110A3 RDD 6W HP 3PAR 7400 OS Suite Base LTU Supp
1 HA110A3 RDG 6W HP 3PAR 7400 Virtual Copy Base LTU Supp
1 HA110A3 RDJ 6W HP 3PAR 7400 Adaptive Opt Base LTU Supp
1 HA110A3 RDK 6W HP 3PAR 7400 Dynamic Opt Base LTU Supp
1 HA110A3 RDQ 6W HP 3PAR 7400 Reporting Suite LTU Supp
192 HA110A3 WSF 6W HP 3PAR Internal Entitlement Purpose
40 HA110A3 WUS 6W HP 3PAR 7000 Drives under 1TB Support
8 HA110A3 WUU 6W HP 3PAR 7000 200GB SSD Support
1 HA110A3 WUW 6W HP 3PAR 7000 Drive Enclosure Support
1 HA110A3 WVA 6W HP 3PAR 7400 2-node Storage Base Supp
1 HA114A1 UW HP Installation and Startup Service
1 HA114A1 5TQ UW HP Startup 3PAR 7400 2-Nd Strg Base SVC
1 HA114A1 5TV UW HP Startup 3PAR 7000 2U SAS Enclosre SVC
4 QK734A 1Y HP Premier Flex LC / LC OM4 2f 5m Cbl
3 HF383A1 4J HP CP Svc for Storage Training
1 HA124A1 UW HP Technical Installation Startup SVC
1 HA124A1 5TM UW HP Startup 3PAR 7000 Reporting Ste SVC
1 HA124A1 5TB UW HP Startup 3PAR 7000 Dynamic Opt SVC
1 HA124A1 5TC UW HP Startup 3PAR 7000 Adaptive Opt SVC
Model with 2 controllers and possibility of expansion if necessary 2 more.
Additional warranty - 3 years.
Delivery time - 10 weeks from the prepayment.

11 weeks have passed

So, 2 boxes with fully assembled (discs stuck in the slots) bundles arrived at the office. Since the item was paid in the contract
HP Installation and Startup Service and HP Technical Installation Startup SVC to my engineers, I forbade touching boxes. Telephone calls started to the supplier, to the Far East representative office of HP and to the Moscow office of HP with the question “When” !!! HP-DV was surprised, but after 4 days sent 2 engineers to configure.
They immediately said that they were doing this for the first time. They started setting up the paper sent from HP-Russia. It soon became clear (on the second day) that we still need a virtual server on VMware to deploy the management program. Server allocated.
By the end of 3 days, the specialists installed the devices in the rack, connected them to the existing storage system, gave addresses, passwords, logins, connected the FC disk to the server and left. I was alarmed a little that the host sees the disk as 4 devices, but the engineers know better.
On the docks from the HP website, we broke volumes, set up CPG and optimization. The real performance increase was not long in coming. Even without test type iometer, the increase in 1C was impressive.

Bug work

Two months have passed, and I suddenly remembered about the contract line - 3 pieces of HP CP Svc for Storage Training. At one time, it was included in the price to get an additional discount (the amount of the discount significantly covered the cost of the position). Through HP-DV, we learned that this is the cost of training 1 person on a basic setup course. HP site prompted the date of the next course - July 8-10.
We prepare documents and a person flies to the "non-rubber" to gain knowledge. 8 numbers call from him - there are deeper courses, begin July 11, cost money. By bank transfer, we naturally do not have time to pay. Somehow at the last moment we pay cash, we draw up a contract for an individual (HP does not know how to issue a contract with a lawyer).
Upon the arrival of a specialist, finally home, we begin to analyze what and how we set up earlier, we understand that everything is not according to Feng Shui. We are remaking the connection method on the servers using MPIO (that’s where the 4 previously confusing disks came from), reconfiguring the CPG and adjusting it to HP canons.

Conclusion

So, the main conclusion is that the system is almost completely satisfied with the work; good (almost excellent) tools for monitoring conditions, monitoring performance, etc. Reports in 1C really loaded at times faster, there was not a single complaint about stopping the service. The piece of iron performs its task perfectly! At the same time, we are reorienting the old “sold” EVA to other tasks now, which is good news. By the way, I very much RAID-5 in terms of speed (and it doesn’t hang out).
upd: Pleases tech support. When we as a result of the experiment exceeded the reserve 85% of the volume of the disks - they immediately phoned and warned.

But:
1. Why wasn’t it possible to configure MPIO by HP engineers? Did religion not allow or did not give normal instructions?
2. Is it really not possible to give more detailed information about the same courses, time, line as such?
3. HP Learning Center - very inflexible under contracts, payment terms, etc. A company, having bought a product for far from 1-2 million rubles, cannot teach a specialist a 25 sput. with a delay of payment in 2-3 days? IMHO, nonsense. As a result, we could not arrange the training “on white” correctly.
Of course, it is necessary to take into account that this was the first experience of sales and configuration of this system in the Far East, but the sediment remained.