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

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>

Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Fax to

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.


"Jim Franz" <franz400@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx

"Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

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.
----- 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 
> configuring for RAID-5, that way user data will be spread over 3 disk 
> 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

This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing 
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives

This thread ...


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page