HP HP0-J11 : Replication Solutions for the HP StorageWorks EVA Exam
Exam Dumps Organized by Montague
Latest 2021 Updated HP0-J11 test
Dumps | dumps collection with real Questions
100% valid HP0-J11 Real Questions - Updated Daily - 100% Pass Guarantee
Dumps Source : Download 100% Free HP0-J11 Dumps PDF and VCE
Test Number : HP0-J11
Test Name : Replication Solutions for the HP StorageWorks EVA
Vendor Name : HP
Update : Click Here to Check Latest Update
Question Bank : Check Questions
Total HP0-J11 test
Questions dumps collection or investment company from killexams
killexams.com is the current preparation source for completing the HP HP0-J11 exam. They have cautiously complied a bank with real HP0-J11 questions containing real test
questions as well as answers, that happen to be up to date together with the equal rate of recurrence as real Replication Solutions for the HP StorageWorks EVA test
is kept up to date, and looked over by means of this specialists.
We provide true HP0-J11 libro electronico test Questions and Answers Questions and Answersin 2 arrangements. HP0-J11 PDF data and HP0-J11 VCE test
simulator. Cross HP HP0-J11 real test quickly together with effectively. The real HP0-J11 Latest Questions PDF format is provided for reading at any device. It will be possible to publications HP0-J11 Free test
PDF to make your individual book. Their own pass amount is higher to 98. 9% as well as the equivalence amount between each of their HP0-J11 examine guide together with real test is 98%. Do you want success in the HP0-J11 test
in barely one analyze? Straight away displays bursting with HP HP0-J11 real exams for killexams.com.
HP HP0-J11 test
is not likewise easy to prepare with merely HP0-J11 wording books or perhaps free practice test available on world-wide-web. There are several tricky questions required in true HP0-J11 test
that bring about the choice to bamboozle and neglect the exam. This situation is handled by simply killexams.com by collecting real HP0-J11 Test Prep around form of test
dumps and VCE test
simulator. You just need to be able to obtain hundred percent free HP0-J11 practice test prior to when you register for whole version involving HP0-J11 Test Prep. You will satisfy while using quality involving PDF Braindumps.
Features of Killexams HP0-J11 Free test
-> Prompt HP0-J11 Free test
PDF obtain Connection
-> Comprehensive HP0-J11 Questions together with Answers
-> 98% Success Price of HP0-J11 Exam
-> Secured real HP0-J11 test
-> HP0-J11 Questions Updated upon Regular foundation.
-> Valid and 2021 Updated HP0-J11 test
-> 100% Handheld HP0-J11 test
-> Entire featured HP0-J11 VCE test
-> Lots of HP0-J11 test
-> Great Discounts
-> 100% Secure obtain Profile
-> 100% Secrecy Ensured
-> hundred percent Success Guarantee
-> 100% Free Free test
PDF to get evaluation
-> Not any Hidden Expense
-> No Regular Charges
-> Not any Automatic Profile Renewal
-> HP0-J11 test
Update Intimation by simply Email
-> Free Technical Support
Exam Detail for: https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/HP0-J11
Pricing Particulars at: https://killexams.com/exam-price-comparison/HP0-J11
Discover Complete Variety: https://killexams.com/vendors-exam-list
Discounted Coupon upon Full HP0-J11 Free test
PDF Test Prep;
WC2020: 60% Fixed Discount on each of your exam
PROF17: 10% More Discount upon Value Greater than $69
DEAL17: 15% Further Discounted on Worth Greater than 99 dollars
Format | HP0-J11 Course Contents | HP0-J11 Course Outline | HP0-J11 test
Syllabus | HP0-J11 test
Killexams Review | Reputation | Testimonials | Feedback
Pleased to hear that Latest dumps of HP0-J11 test
are available here.
I took this test
leftover month together with passed this thanks to my very own instruction together with the killexams.com kit. that is the outstanding test
dump, higher reliable as compared with I could foresee. All questions are good, and it is ordinarily much of perform information. larger and extra trustworthy than I expected tutorial I flushed with about 97%, i am talking about the unfamiliar HP0-J11 test
score. I not learn why hence few THIS people comprehend about killexams.com, or maybe it is my traditional environment well, I will be distributing the word amongst my close friends for the reason that it is outstanding and can be beneficial to a number of.
It is extraordinary to have HP0-J11 braindumps.
although I have adequate background and revel in in IT, I actually expected the particular HP0-J11 test
to be tough. killexams.com has savedmy time and money, without these Questions plus Answers Rankings have were unable the HP0-J11 exam. I got careworn pertaining to few questions, so I almosthad to speculate, but which can be my fault. I need to have got memorized very well and hear the questions higher. Its top to determine that I handed the HP0-J11 exam.
No hassle! 24 hrs practise of HP0-J11 test
Positioned out such a particular present after a while. Absolutely everyone here is cooperative together with able. Producers provided all of us very goodmaterial for HP0-J11 practice test.
I am very happy with this HP0-J11 study guide.
Utilizing attempting various braindumps, I used your own HP0-J11 Dumps and it contained precise answers added within the easy manner that was just what I demanded. I used to be struggling with matters, while this test
HP0-J11 become 15 day out. I used to be scared that I will not have the ability to get transferring marks. I obtained 78% symbolizes without any trouble with killexams.com dumps.
Can you agree with that every one HP0-J11 questions I had have been requested in real exam.
Before sensing killexams.com, I was skeptical of the HP0-J11 test
success but as soon when i made your free account right here I recently found a whole brand new material which become the beginning of the successful ability. You can get absolutely organized HP0-J11 dumps through real exams questions and answers. I was assigned a number of test
questions or answers together with a set song to follow which usually became quite precise and even comprehensive. This kind of assisted us in reaching goal at my HP0-J11 exam. Thank you very much for that.
HP StorageWorks answers
After carrying out a few benchmarks, Microsoft concluded that .internet offers stronger performance and cost-efficiency ratio than WebSphere. IBM rebutted Microsoft’s findings and conducted other exams proving that WebSphere is superior to .web. Microsoft spoke back by using rejecting some of IBM’s claims as false and repeating the tests on distinctive hardware with diverse effects.
Microsoft has benchmarked .net and WebSphere and posted the benchmark supply code, run rules, use rules and a findings file published at wholoveswindows.com entitled Benchmarking IBM WebSphere 7 on IBM Power6 and AIX vs. Microsoft .internet on HP BladeSystem and windows Server 2008. This benchmark indicates a a great deal greater transactions per second (TPS) rate and greater can charge/performance ratio when the usage of WebSphere 7 on windows Server 2008 over WebSphere on AIX 5.three, and even more advantageous outcomes when the usage of .internet on windows Server 2008 over WebSphere on the identical OS. The charge/performance ratio for the application benchmark used is:
IBM energy 570 with WebSphere 7 and AIX 5.three
HP BladeSystem C7000 with WebSphere 7 and windows Server 2008
HP BladeSystem C7000 with .web and windows Server 2008
linked sponsored content material
IBM has rebutted Microsoft’s benchmark and referred to as some of their claims as false, and carried out a special benchmark, with different effects. The benchmark used along with the findings were posted in Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .web 3.5 with WebSphere 7! (PDF). The supply code of the benchmark changed into now not posted. The consequences display WebSphere as a higher performing center-tier than .net with 36% greater TPS for one utility benchmark and from 176% to 450% superior throughput for one of IBM’s usual benchmarks.
Microsoft spoke back to IBM and defended their claims and benchmarking outcomes with Response to IBM’s Whitepaper Entitled Benchmarking and Beating Microsoft .web three.5 with WebSphere 7 (PDF). Microsoft has additionally re-run their benchmark, modified to encompass a special look at various circulation similar to the one used with the aid of IBM of their exams, operating it on different hardware, a single multi-core server, founding that certainly WebSphere is more advantageous than .web if using IBM’s examine stream however handiest a little bit enhanced, between 3% and %6, not as pronounced by IBM. anyway that, these later findings don't trade the fashioned ones when you consider that the benchmark turned into run on a different hardware configuration. within the conclusion, Microsoft invites IBM to “an independent lab to operate additional testing”.
Microsoft checking out .net towards WebSphere
Microsoft has carried out a series of checks evaluating WebSphere/Java in opposition t .net on three diverse structures. The details of the benchmarks performed and the examine consequences were posted in the whitepaper entitled Benchmarking IBM WebSphere® 7 on IBM® Power6™ and AIX vs. Microsoft® .net on Hewlett Packard BladeSystem and home windows Server® 2008 (PDF).
IBM vigour 570 (energy 6) running IBM WebSphere 7 on AIX 5.three
eight IBM Power6 cores at 4.2GHz
32 GB RAM
four x 1 GB NICs
Hewlett Packard BladeSystem C7000 running IBM WebSphere 7 on home windows Server 2008
4 Hewlett Packard ProLiant BL460c blades
One Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® E5450 (3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 80W) Processor/blade
32 GB RAM/blade
windows Server 2008/sixty four-bit/blade
2 x 1 GB NICs/blade
Hewlett Packard BladeSystem C7000 working .net on home windows Server 2008
same as the outdated one but the applications proven run on .web as an alternative of WebSphere.
a few three checks had been performed on each platform:
exchange internet application Benchmarking The functions tested have been IBM’s exchange 6.1 and Microsoft’s StockTrader 2.04. This series of exams have evaluated the efficiency of complete information-driven internet applications working on accurate of the above mentioned platforms. The web pages accessed had one or continually more operations serviced by way of courses contained by way of the company layer and ending with synchronous database calls.
change core Tier internet features Benchmarking This benchmark became supposed to measure the performance of the net service layer executing operations which ended up in database transactions. The examine changed into corresponding to web application, but operations had been counted for my part.
WS look at various web services Benchmarking This look at various became just like the previous one but there turned into no company good judgment nor database access. This was in response to WSTest workload at first devised by way of solar and augmented through Microsoft. The features tier provided 3 operations: EchoList, EchoStruct and GetOrder. Having no business good judgment, the check measured most effective the raw performance of the internet provider software.
Two database configurations had been used, one for the all-IBM platform and another for the other two: IBM DB2 V9.5 business version with IBM DB2 V9.5 JDBC drivers for records access and SQL Server 2008 databases commercial enterprise edition. Two databases had been install for each configuration operating on HP BL680c G5 blades:
four Quad-Core Intel XEON CPUs, @2.4GHZ (16 cores in each and every blade)
64 GB RAM
four x 1GB NICs
IBM DB 9.5 enterprise edition 64-bit or Microsoft SQL Server 2008 sixty four-bit
Microsoft home windows Server 2008 64-bit, commercial enterprise edition
2 4GB HBAs for fiber/sans entry to the EVA 4400 storage
The storage changed into secured on HP StorageWorks EVA 4400 Disk Array:
96 15K drives total
4 logical volumes together with 24 drives each
Database server 1: Logical volume 1 for logging
Database server 1: Logical quantity 2 for database
Database server 2: Logical extent 3 for logging
Database server 2: Logical volume four for database
The net utility benchmark used 32 client machines running examine scripts. each and every laptop simulated hundreds of clients having a 1 second believe time. The assessments used an tailored edition of IBM’s trade 6.1 application on SUT #1 & #2 and Microsoft’s StockTrader utility on SUT #3.
For the net carrier and WSTest benchmarks, Microsoft used 10 purchasers with a 0.1s think time. For WSTest, the databases were not accessed. Microsoft has created a WSTest-compliant benchmark for WebSphere 7 and JAX-WS and an additional in C# for .web the use of WCF.
Microsoft’s whitepaper incorporates more particulars on how the tests were carried out together with the DB configuration, DB entry used, caching configuration, check scripts, tuning parameters used and others.
The benchmarking results including the fees/efficiency ratio are shown in the following table:
IBM power 570 with WebSphere 7 and AIX 5.3
HP BladeSystem C7000 with WebSphere 7 and windows Server 2008
HP BladeSystem C7000 with .internet and home windows Server 2008
complete core-Tier equipment charge
change web utility Benchmark
alternate center Tier net provider Benchmark
WSTest EchoList examine10,536 TPS
WSTest EchoStruct check11,378 TPS
WSTest GetOrder verifyeleven,009 TPS
in accordance with Microsoft’s benchmarking results, operating WebSphere on HP BladeSystem with windows Server 2008 is about 30% greater productive and the can charge-performance ratio is 5 times decrease than operating WebSphere on IBM energy 570 with AIX 5.3. The .web/home windows Server 2008 configuration is even more efficient and the charge/performance ratio drops to half in comparison to WebSphere/home windows Server 2008 and it's 10 times smaller than WebSphere/vigour 570/AIX. The charge-efficiency ratio is so high for the primary platform since the cost of the whole middle-tier is over $250,000 whereas the performance is reduce than the different structures.
Microsoft’s benchmarking whitepaper (PDF) incorporates an appendix with comprehensive particulars of the hardware and application charges. The benchmarking tests used, including supply code, are published on StockTrader web site.
In one other paper, Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .web three.5 with WebSphere 7! (PDF), IBM has rejected Microsoft’s benchmark and created yet another one showing that WebSphere is performing more desirable than .internet.
Microsoft had mentioned that StockTrader is comparable to IBM’s alternate utility:
Microsoft created an software it is functionally similar to the IBM WebSphere exchange application, each when it comes to person functionality and core-tier database entry, transactional and messaging habits.
IBM rejected Microsoft’s claim:
The application claims to be “functionally equal” to the IBM WebSphere alternate 6.1 pattern software. It is not a “port” of the utility in any feel. Little, if any, of the fashioned utility design become ported. Microsoft has made this an software that showcases the use of its proprietary technologies. an immense indication of this is the incontrovertible fact that the .net StockTrader software is not a universally accessible internet application considering that it may well handiest be accessed through the use of cyber web Explorer, and never by means of different net browsers.
moreover, IBM spoke of that alternate turned into no longer designed to benchmark WebSphere’s efficiency but somewhat to
serve as a demo application illustrating the utilization of the elements and services contained in WebSphere and how they regarding software efficiency. in addition, the utility served as a demo which allowed developers to explore the tuning capabilities of WebSphere.
IBM had different complaints concerning Microsoft’s benchmark:
Microsoft created a completely new application [StockTrader] and claimed practical equivalence at the application degree. The reality is that the Microsoft version of the utility used proprietary SQL statements to access the database, unlike the original edition of alternate 6.1 which changed into designed to be a portable and ordinary software.
They employed customer side scripting to shift probably the most utility feature to the client.
They confirmed internet functions capabilities by using inserting an needless HTTP server between the WebSphere server and the client.
And If that turned into not sufficient, they did not thoroughly video display and adjust the WebSphere application server to achieve peak performance.
IBM’s aggressive mission office group (CPO) has ported StockTrader 2.0 to WebSphere growing CPO StockTrader and claiming: “we did a port that faithfully reproduced Microsoft’s utility design. The intent was to obtain an apples-to-apples comparison.” So, trader 6.1 become ported by way of Microsoft from WebSphere to .net under the identify StockTrader and ported once again by way of IBM lower back to WebSphere beneath the identify CPO StockTrader. IBM benchmarked CPO StockTrader in opposition t StockTrader and received stronger effects for WebSphere in opposition t .net:
IBM has additionally advised they're the usage of pleasant bank, an software intended to benchmark WebSphere against .internet. in this check WebSphere outperforms .web a few instances:
in their StockTrader vs. CPO StockTrader benchmark, IBM used scripts simulating consumer undertaking: “login, getting rates, stock buy, inventory promote, viewing of the account portfolio, then a logoff” and working in stress mode without feel times. 36 users have been simulated, enough to drive each server at highest throughput and utilization. The information again turned into validated and errors have been discarded.
The front conclusion changed into implemented with WebSphere 7/home windows Server 2008 in a single case and .net 3.5 with IIS 7/home windows Server 2008 in the other. The back conclusion database changed into DB2 8.2 and SQL Server 2005, each on home windows Server 2003.
The hardware used for checking out become:
efficiency testing tool HardwareX345 8676 Server2 X 3.06 GHz Intel Processor with Hyper Thread Technology8 GB RAM18.2 GB 15K rpm SCSC hard Disk Drive1 GB Ethernet interfaceApplication Server Hardware IBM X3950 Server, 8 x 3.50 Ghz, Intel Xeon Processors with Hyper Thread know-how, sixty four GB RAMDatabase Server HardwareX445 8670 Server, 8x three.0 Ghz. Intel Xeon Processors with Hyper Thread expertise, 16 GB RAMUltraSCSI 320 Controller , EXP 300 SCSI enlargement Unit, 14x 18.2 GB 15K rpm difficult Disk drive configured as 2 Raid Arrays.One for Logs & One for Database, every array is made from 7 difficult disks in a Raid 0 configuration.The Ethernet network backbone The remoted network hardware is produced from 3x 3Comm SuperStack 4950 switches and one 3 Comm SuperStack 4924 change operating at 1 GB.
The software and hardware configuration for the friendly bank benchmark turned into corresponding to the StockTrader one.
IBM’s whitepaper includes advice in regards to the friendly financial institution utility, but does not aspect to the source code. It additionally mentions that the application became in the beginning designed for .web Framework 1.1 and became simply recompiled on .internet 3.5 devoid of being updated to use the latest applied sciences.
Microsoft Response to IBM’s Rebuttal
Microsoft has replied to IBM’s rebuttal in yet yet another whitepaper, Response to IBM’s Whitepaper Entitled Benchmarking and Beating Microsoft .net three.5 with WebSphere 7 (PDF). during this doc, Microsoft defends their fashioned benchmarking effects and affirms that IBM made some false claims in their rebuttal doc entitled Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .net three.5 with WebSphere 7!, and IBM did not use an appropriate benchmarking process. extra has been posted at wholoveswindows.com.
definitely, Microsoft mentioned here claims are false:
IBM declare: The .web StockTrader does not faithfully reproduce the IBM exchange application functionality.Microsoft response: this claim is fake; the .net StockTrader 2.04 faithfully reproduces the IBM WebSphere exchange utility (using average .net Framework technologies and coding practices), and might be used for reasonable benchmark comparisons between .net three.5 and IBM WebSphere 7.
IBM declare: The .net StockTrader makes use of client-aspect script to shift processing from the server to the client.Microsoft response: this claim is false, there is not any client-aspect scripting in the .internet StockTrader application.
IBM claim: The .net StockTrader uses proprietary SQL.Microsoft response: the .net StockTrader makes use of normal SQL statements coded for SQL Server and/or Oracle; and provides a data access layer for each. The IBM WebSphere 7 exchange utility in a similar fashion uses JDBC queries coded for DB2 and/or Oracle. Neither implementation makes use of kept techniques or features; all company logic runs in the utility server. simple pre-organized SQL statements are used in each applications.
IBM claim: The .internet StockTrader isn't programmed as a universally purchasable, thin-customer web utility. hence it runs most effective on IE, now not in Firefox or other browsers.Microsoft response: basically, the .net StockTrader internet tier is programmed as a universally attainable, pure thin client net utility. however, an easy concern in theuse of HTML remark tags reasons concerns in Firefox; these remark tags are being up to date to permit the ASP.web software to properly render in any trade commonplace browser, together with Firefox.
IBM claim: The .internet StockTrader has error beneath load.Microsoft response: here's false, and this document contains additional benchmark checks and Mercury LoadRunner details proving this IBM claim to be false.
additionally, Microsoft complained that IBM had developed friendly financial institution for .net Framework 1.1 years in the past the usage of out of date applied sciences:
IBM’s friendly financial institution benchmark makes use of an out of date .web Framework 1.1 software that includes technologies equivalent to DCOM which have been out of date for a long time. This benchmark should still be entirely discounted until Microsoft has the probability to assessment the code and replace it for .net three.5, with more moderen technologies for ASP.net, transactions, and home windows communication groundwork (WCF) TCP/IP binary remoting (which changed DCOM because the favored remoting technology).
Microsoft considered IBM failed via not presenting the supply code for CPO StockTrader and pleasant bank functions and reiterated the incontrovertible fact that all of the supply code for Microsoft’s benchmark applications involved during this case had been made public.
Microsoft additionally seen that IBM had used a modified verify script which “protected a heavier emphasis on buys and also included a promote operation”. Microsoft re-performed their benchmark using IBM’s modified check script flow, one including the operations buy and sell beside Login, Portfolio, Logout, on a single four-core application server affirming that
these checks are in accordance with IBM’s revised script and are meant to fulfill some of these IBM rebuttal look at various instances as outlined in IBM’s response paper. They may still not be considered in any manner as a transformation to their fashioned consequences (performed on distinctive hardware, and distinctive check script circulation); because the fashioned effects remain valid.
The examine turned into carried on:
1 HP ProLiant BL460c1 Quad-core Intel Xeon E5450 CPU (three.00 GHz)32 GB RAM2 x 1GB NICsWindows Server 2008 sixty four-bit.web 3.5 (SP1) sixty four-bitIBM WebSphere 64-bit
1 HP ProLiant DL380 G52 Quad-core Intel Xeon E5355 CPUs (2.sixty seven GHz)64 GB RAM2 x 1GB NICsWindows Server 2008 64-bitSQL Server 2008 64-bitDB2 V9.7 sixty four-bit
The outcomes of the examine shows an identical performance for WebSphere and .net.
one in all IBM’s complaints had been that Microsoft inserted an needless HTTP web server in entrance of WebSphere decreasing the number of transactions per 2nd. Microsoft admitted that, but introduced:
using this HTTP Server changed into entirely discussed within the normal benchmark paper, and is done based on IBM’s own top-rated follow deployment instructions for WebSphere. In any such setup, IBM recommends the usage of the IBM HTTP Server (Apache) as the entrance conclusion net Server, which then routes requests to the IBM WebSphere application server. In their exams, they co-observed this HTTP on the same laptop as the utility Server. this is corresponding to the .net/WCF net carrier assessments, the place they hosted the WCF web features in IIS 7, with co-determined IIS 7 HTTP Server routing requests to the .web application pool processing the WCF service operations. So in both assessments, they demonstrated an equivalent setup, the usage of IBM HTTP Server (Apache) as the front end to WebSphere/JAX-WS functions; and Microsoft IIS 7 because the front conclusion to the .net/WCF features. for this reason, they stand behind all their customary outcomes.
Microsoft carried out yet an extra test, the WSTest, devoid of the middleman HTTP web server on a single quad-core server like the previous one, and acquired right here outcome:
each assessments carried out through Microsoft on a single server demonstrate WebSphere conserving a mild performance advantage over .internet however not as a whole lot as IBM pretended in their paper. besides that, Microsoft remarked that IBM did not comment on center-tier charge comparison which significantly favors Microsoft.
Microsoft persisted to challenge IBM to
meet us [Microsoft] in an impartial lab to perform extra trying out of the .web StockTrader and WSTest benchmark workloads and pricing evaluation of the middle tier application servers demonstrated in their benchmark report. moreover, they invite the IBM competitive response group to their lab in Redmond, for dialogue and further checking out of their presence and under their overview.
often, a benchmark carries
a collection of guidelines describing how the workload is to be processed – run guidelines -
a procedure attempting to be sure that the run suggestions are respected and consequences are interpreted as it should be
A benchmark is constantly meant to compare two or greater methods with a view to determine which one is more desirable for performing certain initiatives. Benchmarks are additionally used by way of businesses to enhance their hardware/software before it goes to their valued clientele via trying out different tuning parameters and measuring the outcomes or via recognizing some bottlenecks. Benchmarks can also be used for advertising applications, to prove that a certain equipment has more advantageous efficiency than the competitor’s.
in the starting, benchmarks were used to measure the hardware performance of a gadget, just like the CPU processing vigor. Later, benchmarks had been created to look at various and compare purposes like SPEC MAIL2001 and even application servers like SPECjAppServer2004.
There is not any best benchmark. The workload can also be tweaked to choose a undeniable platform, or the statistics can be misinterpreted or incorrectly extrapolated. To be convincing, a benchmark needs to be as transparent as possible. The workload definition should still be public, and if possible the source code should be made purchasable for those fascinated to study. a transparent set of run suggestions are necessary so different parties can repeat the same tests to look the results for themselves. the style outcomes are interpreted and their that means must be disclosed.
We are not aware about a response from IBM to Microsoft’s ultimate paper. it will be unique to peer their response. probably, the gold standard strategy to clear issues up is for IBM to make the supply code of their tests public so anybody interested could examine and see for themselves where is the reality. until then they are able to simplest speculate on the correctness and validity of these benchmarks.