Neil, Talked to my business partner last night at our LUG. He had a customer that bought an 8xx box with a three disk raid set. Very minimal usage. Testing and development in WAS. 8 second response time. Tried memory and everything else. Added a fourth drive. Dropped down to subsecond immediately. "Leaves of three, let it be." Rob Berendt -- Group Dekko Services, LLC Dept 01.073 PO Box 2000 Dock 108 6928N 400E Kendallville, IN 46755 http://www.dekko.com Neil Palmer/DPS <neilp@xxxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 10/12/2004 05:10 PM Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Fax to Subject Re: very low end i5 performance Haven't actually run or seen one with a 3 disk RAID config. Of course I'd much prefer 4 disks with the parity striping spread over 4 arms instead of the 2 arms a 3 disk config uses, but sometimes keeping cost down is very important (yes you're right - that RAID card add a chunk to the config - so another choice would be a 4 disk Mirrored config). I can't imagine a 3 disk RAID-5 config performing worse than a 2 disk Mirrored config. ...Neil "Jim Franz" <franz400@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx To "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Subject Re: very low end i5 performance Neil - we had a prev posting approx week ago about 3 disk raid setups that seemed to be a performance problem, any comment? Raid card and addtl disk adds over 30% to cost of box. jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Palmer/DPS" <neilp@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:32 PM Subject: Re: very low end i5 performance > Seems reasonably fast, but not really satisfied with disk performance - > which as you may expect is a bit of a bottleneck. Towards the end of an > IPL especially the disk utilization is pegged at 100% for maybe 10 > minutes. I woudl STRONGLY advise adding at least one additional disk and > configuring for RAID-5, that way user data will be spread over 3 disk arms > instead of just one. > > Users seemed pretty happy with it (it wasn't that bad once the IPL > completed in the background, but then they were coming from a model 200 > with 16MB of memory running V3R2). > > ...Neil > > > > > "Jim Franz" <franz400@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx > 2004/10/12 14:05 > > > > To > <MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > cc > > Subject > very low end i5 performance > > > > > > > Anyone care to comment on experiences > with very low end i5 520 > Express Edition 1 w/500cpw, > 1 gig memory > 2 - 35 gig drives mirrored. > twinax console > 30 gb 1/4 in cartridge tape > Would be running small office (10-20 users), webfaced rpg application, > as well as Apache webserver. > tia > jim franz h -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2013 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact