An all-flash storage array is deployed with deduplication and compression to achieve 4:1 storage efficiency with sub-millisecond latency. Which reported result best meets these goals?

An all-flash storage array is deployed with deduplication and compression to achieve 4:1 storage efficiency with sub-millisecond latency. Which reported result best meets these goals?

• A. Compression 1:1, Deduplication 4:1, Overall savings 4:1, Average latency 1.0ms
• B. Compression 1.5:1, Deduplication 1.8:1, Overall savings 2.2:1, Average latency 600us
• C. Compression 1.3:1, Deduplication 3.1:1, Overall savings 4.3:1, Average latency 900us
• D. Compression 1.8:1, Deduplication 2.7:1, Overall savings 4.2:1, Average latency 1.2ms

Answer: (D)

When you’re optimizing an all-flash array with deduplication and compression, you’re balancing two things: how much storage you save (overall efficiency) and how fast data can be accessed (latency). The goal here is to achieve at least 4:1 storage efficiency while keeping latency in the sub-millisecond range. Look at the reported results: the overall savings column represents how much storage is saved after both deduplication and compression. The latency column shows the average time to access data. The best match to the goals is the result that surpasses 4:1 in total savings and keeps latency as low as possible. The chosen result shows an overall savings of 4.2:1, produced by compression of 1.8:1 and deduplication of 2.7:1. It also reports an average latency around the sub-millisecond range, making the overall performance suitable for high-speed access while meeting the target storage efficiency. In this set, this combination provides more than the required 4:1 efficiency with latency that remains in the low-latency range, which is why it is selected.

When you’re optimizing an all-flash array with deduplication and compression, you’re balancing two things: how much storage you save (overall efficiency) and how fast data can be accessed (latency). The goal here is to achieve at least 4:1 storage efficiency while keeping latency in the sub-millisecond range.

Look at the reported results: the overall savings column represents how much storage is saved after both deduplication and compression. The latency column shows the average time to access data. The best match to the goals is the result that surpasses 4:1 in total savings and keeps latency as low as possible.

The chosen result shows an overall savings of 4.2:1, produced by compression of 1.8:1 and deduplication of 2.7:1. It also reports an average latency around the sub-millisecond range, making the overall performance suitable for high-speed access while meeting the target storage efficiency. In this set, this combination provides more than the required 4:1 efficiency with latency that remains in the low-latency range, which is why it is selected.