NetApp Read Caching

In my previous post I gave a high level overview of how NetApp uses NVRAM for write caching. Now I want to move on to read caching in main memory and NetApp Flash Cache/Flash Pool features.

Layers of Memory

The first layer of read caching in NetApp is main memory. For example, there is 4GB of ECC main memory in FAS3140 as opposed to 512MB of NVRAM. It’s 12GB for FAS3220. You can check amount of main memory in your filer by running:

> sysconfig -a

But if you have a random read intensive environment and the size of main memory is too small for your workloads, instead of buying additional spindles you can consider using Flash Cache or Flash Pool features.

Flash Cache (formerly PAM – Performance Acceleration Module) is a PCIe card with flash memory chips on board. The most recent Flash Cache II modules have 2TB of flash. And you can fit as many as 4 such cards in high-end 6xxx NetApp series (or 8 x 1TB cards).

Flash Pool is basically a SSD drive Raid Group which is combined with HDD Raid Groups in the same aggregate to provide caching capabilities. Data is copied (not moved) from HDDs to SSDs to give faster access to more frequently used (hot) data blocks. Both Flash Cash and Flash Pool use FIFO logic to eject less frequently used (cold) data from cache.

Flash Cache

Flash Cache is a second level of read cache memory. When filer decides to evict cached data from main memory, it’s actually moved to a Flash Cash card. Similarly, when client needs to read a data block and filer doesn’t have the data in main memory it now first looks up in Flash Cache and if it’s not there, data is retrieved from disk.

Flash Cache can operate in three modes: Metadata Caching, Normal User Data Caching (default) and Low-Priority Data Caching. First mode caches only metadata, second caches metadata and data blocks and the last one lets you cache data which is not normally cached, which is writes and sequential reads.

In fact, when write request comes into the system, it’s actually cached in main memory first and then logged in NVRAM. When CP occurs, data is sent to hard drives and becomes a first target for eviction from main memory after that.  If you enable Low-Priority Data Caching this data goes to Flash Cash card instead. It’s not write caching per se, because writes have been already sent to disks. But it’s helpful in workloads, when data which has just been written may need to be accessed again in a short period of time. It’s called read-write caching.

Caching sequential reads is generally not a good idea, because they overwrite large amounts of cache. But if your environment may benefit from that, you again can use Low-Priority Data Caching option.

Flash Pool

Flash Pool has one significant difference from Flash Cache. It works at an aggregate level, not at system level as Flash Cache. If you have only one stack of shelves and one aggregate, it makes no difference. But it’s almost always not the case.

Read Caching

Flash Pool uses essentially the same mechanism for read caching. When data is first accessed it goes to main memory. When filer needs to free up some space in main memory, blocks are moved to SSD disks as part of a Consistency Point.

NetApp uses scanner to evict blocks from SSD cache (see figure above). When cache gets full, scanner kicks in and reduces each block’s temperature by one level. Blocks with the lowest temperature are evicted. Each time block is accessed by client it’s temperature is incremented.

Write caching

Flash Pool can be used for write caching of partial overwrites, in contrast to Flash Cache which is purely a read cache.

WAFL is optimized for writes, because filer can put data at any place in file system. And when new data comes in, filer makes a so called “full write”, which writes a full stripe of data and parity. But when part of stripe needs to be overwritten, all other data blocks from the stripe need to be read from disk to recalculate parity. It’s a very expensive operation. Flash Pool can be used to cache partial overwrites and even better optimize performance.

If write caching is enabled, instead of going to HDDs this data is written to SSD disks as part of a Consistency Point. And unlike read caching it exists temporarily only on SSDs.

After each scanner run, write cache block temperature is decremented by one. When write is overwritten, it’s temperature gets back to normal, but it can’t go higher than that. When block is about to be evicted, it’s read back to main memory and then written to HDDs as part of next CP.

Policies

Flash Pool read/write policies are almost the same as Flash Cache ones. Read policies are: meta, random read (default), random-read-write, none. Write policies: random-write, none (default).

Notes

Flash Pool and Flash Cache can be combined in one system and configured at per volume level. But Flash Cache can’t be used for volumes which are already being cached by Flash Pool. It’s either-or.

NetApp filers have Predictive Cache Statistics (PCS) feature built in, which allows you to analyse your workload and predict if storage system will benefit from additional cache.

Further Reading

TR-3832: Flash Cache Best Practices Guide

TR-3801: Introduction to Predictive Cache Statistics

TR-4070: Flash Pool Design and Implementation Guide

Differences between NetApp Flash Cache and Flash Pool

Advertisement

NetApp NVRAM and Write Caching

Overview

NetApp storage systems use several types of memory for data caching. Non-volatile battery-backed memory (NVRAM) is used for write caching (whereas main memory and flash memory in forms of either extension PCIe card or SSD drives is used for read caching). Before going to hard drives all writes are cached in NVRAM. NVRAM memory is split in half and each time 50% of NVRAM gets full, writes are being cached to the second half, while the first half is being written to disks. If during 10 seconds interval NVRAM doesn’t get full, it is forced to flush by a system timer.

To be more precise, when data block comes into NetApp it’s actually written to main memory and then journaled in NVRAM. NVRAM here serves as a backup, in case filer fails. When data has been written to disks as part of so called Consistency Point (CP), write blocks which were cached in main memory become the first target to be evicted and replaced by other data.

Caching Approach

NetApp is frequently criticized for small amounts of write cache. For example FAS3140 has only 512MB of NVRAM, FAS3220 has a bit more 1,6GB. In mirrored HA or MetroCluster configurations NVRAM is mirrored via NVRAM interconnect adapter. Half of the NVRAM is used for local operations and another half for the partner’s. In this case the amount of write cache becomes even smaller. In FAS32xx series NVRAM has been integrated into main memory and is now called NVMEM. You can check the amount of NVRAM/NVMEM in your filer by running:

> sysconfig -a

The are two answers to the question why NetApp includes less cache in their controllers. The first one is given in white paper called “Optimizing Storage Performance and Cost with Intelligent Caching“. It states that NetApp uses different approach to write caching, compared to other vendors. Most often when data block comes in, cache is used to keep the 8KB data block, as well as 8KB inode and 8KB indirect block for large files. This way, write cache can be thought as part of the physical file system, because it mimics its structure. NetApp on the other hand uses journaling approach. When data block is received by the filer, 8KB data block is cached along with 120B header. Header contains all the information needed to replay the operation. After each cache flush Consistency Point (CP) is created, which is a special type of consistent file system snapshot. If controller fails, the only thing which needs to be done is reverting file system to the latest consistency point and replaying the log.

But this white paper was written in 2010. And cache journaling is not a feature unique to NetApp. Many vendors are now using it. The other answer, which makes more sense, was found on one of the toaster mailing list archives here: NVRAM weirdness (UNCLASSIFIED). I’ll just quote the answer:

The reason it’s so small compared to most arrays is because of WAFL. We don’t need that much NVRAM because when writes happen, ONTAP writes out single complete RAID stripes and calculates parity in memory. If there was a need to do lots of reads to regenerate parity, then we’d have to increase the NVRAM more to smooth out performance.

NVLOG Shipping

A feature called NVLOG shipping is an integral part of sync and semi-sync SnapMirror. NVLOG shipping is simply a transfer of NVRAM writes from the primary to a secondary storage system.  Writes on primary cannot be transferred directly to NVRAM of the secondary system, because in contrast to mirrored HA and MetroCluster, SnapMirror doesn’t have any hardware implementation of the NVRAM mirroring. That’s why the stream of data is firstly written to the special files on the volume’s parent aggregate on the secondary system and then are read to the NVRAM.

Documents I found useful:

WP-7107: Optimizing Storage Performance and Cost with Intelligent Caching

TR-3326: 7-Mode SnapMirror Sync and SnapMirror Semi-Sync Overview and Design Considerations

TR-3548: Best Practices for MetroCluster Design and Implementation

United States Patent 7730153: Efficient use of NVRAM during takeover in a node cluster