C80 Database workloads | NetApp | Page 1

covert nexus Jun 3, 2025, 12:26 PM

#

Hi, I'm looking to replace a 3PAR with about 180TiB of storage that is currently sitting on a spinning disk array. 💩🤢

Workloads are mostly Oracle and MSSQL.
There is no question whether it will run better than the HDD based 3PAR.
Just wanted to get some feedback and experience regarding DB workloads on C-Series.

Especially when scaling up.

I'm currently looking at the C80 or C800.
I'd like to go with the new model, but looking at the specs, I'm concerned that the C80 might not have the same Oomph as the C800.

jagged current Jun 3, 2025, 1:37 PM

#

the C80 handles almost twice as much IOPS (at <2ms) as the C800 in an FCP benchmark, I wonder where you get the impression that it is slower... The C800 is based on the A800 platform which is from 2018 (with a CPU from 2017). I would alwys go with the newer model

#

Also PCI Gen.5 (vs. Gen.3 on the C800), compression offloading via two QAT engines, 400GbE ready, ...

spare raven Jun 3, 2025, 5:22 PM

#

Please, do not simply compare “specs” as it is horribly misleading. As @jagged current mentioned the c80 is two generations better than the older hardware and has better offloading of efficiencies using QAT.

Just because the process has fewer cores or there is less ram shouldn’t impact the decision (unless you are comparing to current hardware!)

covert nexus Jun 3, 2025, 7:31 PM

#

I am very aware, that newer CPUs are much more capable.
My main concern was the memory.
From more than 1TB down to 256 seems like a huge downgrade at first glance.
Thanks @jagged current for the details.

jagged current Jun 3, 2025, 7:55 PM

#

lots of RAM is only really an advantage in FAS systems, where a large cache can overcome some of the latency issues if your workload fits into the RAM. For AFF systems, it really makes no noticeable difference.

#C80 Database workloads