You have Proposed HP 3PAR StoreServ thin provisioning capability to achieve a 40 % reduction
in raw storage requirements. The customer considers all storage vendors thin provisioning equal.
What are the competitive differentiators of HP 3PAR StoreServ thin provisioning? (Select two)
A.
fills empty volume space with zeros for space reclaim identification
B.
does not require resource pools
C.
provides equivalent performance to a normally provisioned volume
D.
features dynamic RAID level conversion based on peak write demand statistics to maintain
performance
E.
automatically converts fully provisioned volumes to thin volumes
B C
0
0
B and C is correct: http://www8.hp.com/h20195/V2/getpdf.aspx/4AA3-2784ENW.pdf?ver=1.0
0
0
hmmm… or A and C could also be since 3PAR likes to talk about space reclamation…
0
0
I mean, A and B.
apologies…
0
0
crits – 3PAR does not add zeros. The processors remove the zeros in order to reclaim space. Therefore “A” is incorrect.
I feel that B and C are correct.
0
0
I’m going to say C & D are the best answers. A is wrong, 3par does not write zero’s to disk, that’s part of the inline / ASIC thin feature / detection. B is is probably incorrect bc the thin technologies most likely rely on resource pools. There are multiple low level levels of abstraction going on with 3par, most likely, resource pools are involved. The way E is worded is weird: “Automatically” converts full Volumes to Thin? Um, not quite. That’s more of an On-Demand kind of thing via the admin, so E’s no beuno.
C Looks Good –> Thin Volume has equal performance to Fully provisioned volume? Sure, I’ll bite.
D Looks Good –> Dynamic (on demand via admin) RAID conversion based on Peak Write Statistics? I’ll bite.
0
0
I take that back, maybe it’s C & E. The answers are worded funky. D looks ok, but based only on write statistics? I think now maybe its gota be C & E
0
0
I agree with C and E – D has nothing to do with Thin provisioning. A is just wrong
0
0