A cloud administrator has deployed a new all-flash storage array with deduplication and compression enabled, and moved some of the VMs into it. The goal was to achieve 4:1 storage efficiency while maintaining sub-millisecond latency. Which of the following results would BEST suit the requirements?
A. Compression 1:1Deduplication 4:1
Overall savings 4:1
Average latency 1.0ms
B. Compression 1.5:1Deduplication 1.8:1
Overall savings 2.2:1
Average latency 600us
C. Compression 1.3:1Deduplication 3.1:1
Overall savings 4.3:1
Average latency 900us
D. Compression 1.8:1Deduplication 2.7:1
Overall savings 4.2:1
Average latency 1.2ms
Wrong. The goals require 4:1 compression AND SUB 1ms latency. B is automatically eliminated due to low compression (2.2:1). Of the remaining, A and D are at or above 1ms latency. Answer is C. Simple process of elimination.
I’m so confused I understand the final values of compression and deduplication ratios aren’t all that important (they are the means to an end). The overall goal is to achieve a 4:1 storage ratio while keeping the latency under 1 ms. None of these meet the full criteria. So the question becomes which of these factors is more important, efficiency or latency? D obviously cannot be correct, and it’s hardly likely that B is either. So that leaves A (4:1 with 1.0ms) and C (3:1 with 0.9ms). Personally, I think a 4:1 storage efficiency with an extra 0.1ms RTT is better than the 3:1 option. This could mean huge savings in storage costs. So I’m going with A.
Answer is C, the questions are warped it should be compression 3:1 and deduplication 1:1, it states the goal is to achieve 4:1 but which one BEST suits requirements. overall savings of C is 3:1 while B is only 2:1
I am not understanding why this is correct. I get that it has the highest compression ratio, and the highest savings, but the latency is above the one millisecond threshold. Why wouldn’t it be B or C