Re: Using RSTSTG with larger disks -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: Re: Using RSTSTG with larger disks
From: Pat Barber <mboceanside@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 10:54:46 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

By default...the drives were doubled in size and as they
got copied back to a double sized drive, you end up with
a "wierd" but workable balance.

35gb to 70gb with bit mapping = sort of balanced drive.



rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Appreciate the comments, but, (and no disrespect intended) doesn't thissound sort of like a WAG? Or, how does "a weird form of balancing willhappen automatically." happen?
Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.