Bill,
I installed 4 drives at a client site, and the results have been
fantastic.
They knew all their very active files which were used by their
Interactive application, and moved those files to the SSD (we marked them on
the old machine, and during the migration/restore they were put on the
SSDs). There interactive jobs are flying now. In addition, so are some of
the batch jobs that use those files, but their (customer's) primary concern
was their interactive performance.
So, in summary there was no trouble to setting them up. Yes, they
could have let the system do the analysis, but that would have moved the
most active files, and not given preference to interactive over batch.
Pete
Pete Massiello
iTech Solutions
http://www.itechsol.com
Add iTech Solutions on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126431824120
Add iTech Solutionw on LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2206093
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 2:20 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Creating a separate ASP out of drives from existing ASP.
rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
We were hoping to not have to create a separate ASP to keep the data we
want on SSD's on the SSD's. But now I am thinking that will be the only
way to keep it straight.
I've read the issues you've had trying to set these SSD's up for the
best performance. I'm curious as to whether they are really worth the
trouble and whether it would have been better to just drop as much core
memory into the machine as practical and apply a SetObjACC against the
best objects?
Bill
midrange.com
