"超融合与传统架构对比:实现资源优化和简化管理"

版权申诉
0 下载量 47 浏览量 更新于2024-02-22 收藏 2.73MB PPT 举报
超融合方案和传统方案的对比共21页.ppt中,详细对比了超融合架构与传统架构的优劣势。首先,在超融合平台的组件构成方面,标准X86服务器作为计算资源虚拟化带来的收益,相对于传统数据中心业务部署模式下CPU平均资源利用率低于15%的情况,超融合架构通过Hypervisor实现了CPU、内存资源利用率大幅提升,极大地提高了资源的利用率。此外,在存储虚拟化带来的收益方面,传统数据中心存储结构下的备份、部分数据迁移和存储容量、性能瓶颈问题都存在较大的难题和风险,而超融合架构下的存储虚拟化可以显著降低IOPS、容量和备份的成本,并且减轻了数据迁移和管理复杂度。总体来说,超融合架构相比传统架构在计算资源利用率、存储结构扩展方式、风险和管理复杂度等方面都有着明显的优势。 另外,超融合方案和传统方案的对比还包括了超融合方案与传统方案在架构设计、扩展性和成本方面的比较。超融合方案的架构设计更加灵活,可以根据实际需求进行弹性扩展和分布式部署,而传统方案则需要依赖于独立的计算、存储和网络设备,难以实现弹性扩展,且在大规模部署时存在较大的架构复杂度。在成本方面,超融合架构由于整合了计算、存储和网络功能,可以显著降低硬件和软件采购成本,减少数据中心的物理空间占用和能耗消耗,降低数据中心的总体运营成本。而传统方案则需要独立采购各种设备和系统,极大地增加了企业的投资和维护成本。因此,从架构设计和成本两方面来看,超融合方案都具有明显的优势和经济性。 此外,超融合方案和传统方案的对比还涉及到了超融合平台的组件构成、虚拟化带来的收益以及存储虚拟化的优势等方面。通过对21页PPT的分析可以发现,超融合方案相对于传统方案在计算资源利用率、存储结构扩展方式、风险和管理复杂度、架构设计和成本等方面都具有明显的优势。因此,对于企业来说,选择超融合方案将会带来更好的业务运营效率和更低的总体成本,有助于提升企业的竞争力和创新能力。在未来的数据中心建设和优化中,超融合方案无疑将成为企业的首要选择。

SELECT PIS.SHOW_FLT_DETAIL AS SHOW_FLT_DETAIL -- new , PIS.SHOW_AWB_DETAIL AS SHOW_AWB_DETAIL -- new , PIS.DISPLAY_AIRLINE_CODE AS CARRIER_CODE , DECODE(PIS.REVERT_FLOW,'N',PIS.FLOW_TYPE,DECODE(PIS.FLOW_TYPE,'I','E','I')) AS FLOW_TYPE , PIS.SHIP_TO_LOCATION AS SHIP_TO_LOCATION , PIS.INVOICE_SEQUENCE AS INVOICE_SEQUENCE , PFT.FLIGHT_DATE AS FLIGHT_DATE , PFT.FLIGHT_CARRIER_CODE AS FLIGHT_CARRIER_CODE , PFT.FLIGHT_SERIAL_NUMBER AS FLIGHT_SERIAL_NUMBER , PFT.FLOW_TYPE AS AIRCRAFT_FLOW , FAST.AIRCRAFT_SERVICE_TYPE AS AIRCRAFT_SERVICE_TYPE , PPT.AWB_NUMBER AS AWB_NUMBER , PPT.WEIGHT AS WEIGHT , PPT.CARGO_HANDLING_OPERATOR AS CARGO_HANDLING_OPERATOR , PPT.SHIPMENT_PACKING_TYPE AS SHIPMENT_PACKING_TYPE , PPT.SHIPMENT_FLOW_TYPE AS SHIPMENT_FLOW_TYPE , PPT.SHIPMENT_BUILD_TYPE AS SHIPMENT_BUILD_TYPE , PPT.SHIPMENT_CARGO_TYPE AS SHIPMENT_CARGO_TYPE , PPT.REVENUE_TYPE AS REVENUE_TYPE , PFT.JV_FLIGHT_CARRIER_CODE AS JV_FLIGHT_CARRIER_CODE , PPT.PORT_TONNAGE_UID AS PORT_TONNAGE_UID , PPT.AWB_UID AS AWB_UID , PIS.INVOICE_SEPARATION_UID AS INVOICE_SEPARATION_UID , PFT.FLIGHT_TONNAGE_UID AS FLIGHT_TONNAGE_UID FROM PN_FLT_TONNAGES PFT , FZ_AIRLINES FA , PN_TONNAGE_FLT_PORTS PTFP , PN_PORT_TONNAGES PPT , FF_AIRCRAFT_SERVICE_TYPES FAST , SR_PN_INVOICE_SEPARATIONS PIS --new , SR_PN_INVOICE_SEP_DETAILS PISD--new , SR_PN_INV_SEP_PORT_TONNAGES PISPT --new WHERE PFT.FLIGHT_OPERATION_DATE >= trunc( CASE :rundate WHEN TO_DATE('01/01/1900', 'DD/MM/YYYY') THEN ADD_MONTHS(SYSDATE,-1) ELSE ADD_MONTHS(:rundate,-1) END, 'MON') AND PFT.FLIGHT_OPERATION_DATE < trunc( CASE :rundate WHEN TO_DATE('01/01/1900', 'DD/MM/YYYY') THEN TRUNC(SYSDATE) ELSE TRUNC(:rundate) END, 'MON') AND PFT.TYPE IN ('C', 'F') AND PFT.RECORD_TYPE = 'M' AND (PFT.TERMINAL_OPERATOR NOT IN ('X', 'A') OR (PFT.TERMINAL_OPERATOR <> 'X' AND FA.CARRIER_CODE IN (SELECT * FROM SPECIAL_HANDLING_AIRLINE) AND PPT.REVENUE_TYPE IN (SELECT * FROM SPECIAL_REVENUE_TYPE) AND PPT.SHIPMENT_FLOW_TYPE IN (SELECT * FROM SPECIAL_SHIPMENT_FLOW_TYPE) AND PFT.FLIGHT_OPERATION_DATE >= (select EFF_DATE from SPECIAL_HANDLING_EFF_DATE) )) AND PFT.DELETING_DATETIME IS NULL AND FA.AIRLINE_UID = PFT.AIRLINE_UID AND FA.DELETING_DATETIME IS NULL AND PTFP.FLIGHT_TONNAGE_UID = PFT.FLIGHT_TONNAGE_UID AND PTFP.RECORD_TYPE = 'M' AND PTFP.DELETING_DATETIME IS NULL AND PPT.TONNAGE_FLIGHT_PORT_UID (+)= PTFP.TONNAGE_FLIGHT_PORT_UID AND PPT.RECORD_TYPE (+)= 'M' AND PPT.DISCREPANCY_TYPE (+)= 'NONE' AND PPT.ADJUSTMENT_INC_FLAG (+)= 'Y' AND PPT.DELETING_DATETIME (+) IS NULL AND FAST.AIRCRAFT_SERVICE_TYPE_UID = PFT.AIRCRAFT_SERVICE_TYPE_UID AND FAST.DELETING_DATETIME IS NULL AND PIS.TEMPORAL_NAME = TO_CHAR((CASE :rundate --new WHEN TO_DATE('01/01/1900', 'DD/MM/YYYY') THEN TRUNC(SYSDATE) ELSE TRUNC(:rundate) END ), 'YYYYMM') || '00' AND PIS.INVOICE_SEPARATION_UID = PISD.INVOICE_SEPARATION_UID --new AND PISD.INVOICE_SEP_DETAIL_UID = PISPT.INVOICE_SEP_DETAIL_UID --new AND PISPT.PORT_TONNAGE_UID = PPT.PORT_TONNAGE_UID --new AND PIS.PRINT_SUPPORTING_DOC = 'Y';上面是oracle的写法,请转成spark SQL的写法。

2023-06-02 上传