MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » April 2014

Re: 283GB Drives in a set of 139GB Disks..



fixed

Agreed that on other platforms this is basically normal and expected behavior. On IBM i it did not used to be possible and I 'assumed' it still was not. Perhaps this changed with the move to SAS??


- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com
www.iInTheCloud.com

On 4/27/2014 5:44 AM, Wilson Jonathan wrote:

That's fairly standard for raid, the device with the least amount of
storage is the maximum unit size of all members of the raid array.






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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 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