Introduction
This document compares the running time of running discovery in TADDM 7.1.2 on a virtual environment (VMware ESX) and a non-virtual environment. This is not an comprehensive test, and should not take as TADDM performance result, but just as a comparison study of the TADDM Server in different platforms.
Platforms
Virtual environment
Linux RedHat Enterprise Server Release 5
2 vCPU
3600 MB
VMware ESX, with just 1 VM running
Non-virtual Windows environment
Windows 2003 SP2
2 CPUs
3200 MB
TADDM 7.1.2 and DB2 collocated in one server
Non-virtual Linux environment
Linux RedHat Enterprise Server Release 5
2 CPUs
3200 MB
TADDM 7.1.2 and DB2 collocated in one server
Two server, non-virtual environment
TADDM Server in the Windows environment above
DB2 Server in a separate machine, same specification as the server above
Target environment
37 Computer Systems, consisting of Windows, AIX, HP-UX, Solaris and Linux machines.
Number of components found: 315 (3 Server Equivalents)
Running time
| Running time | Virtual environment | Windows environment | Linux environment | Two-server environment |
| Level 3 Discovery | 30 min 47 sec | 8 min 49 sec | 28 min 37 sec | 6 min 4 sec |
| Level 3 Discovery without WebSphereCellSensor | 10 min 36 sec | 7 min 43 sec | 6 min 16 sec | 5 min 8 sec |
| Level 2 Discovery | 10 min 15 sec | 5 min 6 sec | 7 min 34 sec | 4 min 4 sec |
| 100 MB IDML bulk load (250,000 CIs) | 13 hours 9 min | 5 hours 52 min | 13 hours 55 min | 22 hours 19 min |
| Level 3 Rediscovery after bulk load | 30 min 4 sec | 6 min 47 sec | 16 min 25 sec | 6 min 24 sec |
Conclusions
- Even in a small scale, the discovery process in a Virtual environment is almost 4 times slower than in a non-virtual environment
- Although the run time for other activities don't show significant difference, the discovery process in a Virtual environment is just prohibitive.
- Except for bulk loading, a two-server environment had the best performance in all tests.
