× 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.



they are 15K drives.

Well you didn't SAY that!

15K RPM drives make too much heat and draw too much power for the 270 in any location except a FC 5095/0595 drawer. Believe me on this one as I tried 15K RPM IBM drives in FrankieIII and had big troubles. (Also got warnings from 'people who know' in Rochester that this was beyond 'unsupported' and into 'dangerous' territory)
OK It's possible that BCC found some lower power draw units but that would make me worry in another way - Reliability of the drive. Also even though I can only go 10K in FrankieiIII I have never had a disk performance issue. (Maybe that's the 2780 RAID card or the 56 drive he's got, not sure.)

As to "A" and "B" sides you are correct. Unfortunately IBM frequently ships PTFs that automatically perm apply because removal would be fatal so they prevent that. Can't say if such a disk PTF would be one to get perm applied but you never know. Also the "A" and "B" are for microcode only, for O/S and other PTFs you need to RMVPTF if it's still temp applied and then (usually) re-IPL.

- Larry



Joe Pluta wrote:
Well this just sucks.

The primary reason I want to go with the BCC drives is that they are 15K
drives rather than the 10K IBM drives. This machine tops out at V5R4; I
wonder if I should just apply V5R4 and the latest cumes and then never apply
another PTF.

Speaking of PTFs, isn't that what A and B sides are for? Isn't there a
procedure to apply a PTF and if it smokes, to go back to the pre-PTF state?

Joe

From: Larry Bolhuis

We had this exact thing happen to customers using BCC drives. Install
PTF *poof* drive goes away and it was in a 270. Luckily they had just
one so RAID kept them alive until a replacement from BCC arrived that
was compatible with the PTF. (The drive had to be purchased by the way
it was not sent as a replacement for a failed drive.) As I understand
it, the PTF required some particular operation that the older BCC drive
didn't support, when the drive wouldn't answer it got voted off the
island.

IBM Would never do that to their own drives because they know what they
can and cannot do.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.