Re: 17 GB Disk Drives

["Chuck Morehead" <cbmorehead@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Phil,

In my experience I have found that smaller drives (such as 8GB) perform
better in highly interactive environments, while the larger drives (such as
17GB) perform better in more batch oriented environments.  For example, I
have had better luck with the 17 GB drives in data warehousing applications.
Of course the 17 GB drives are more economical, especially if it means that
you don't have to purchase an expansion unit.  I do not have experience with
a mixture of drives of substantially different sizes (e.g. 4GB and 17GB).

Chuck

----- Original Message -----
From: <prumschlag@phdinc.com>
To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 3:51 PM
Subject: 17 GB Disk Drives


>
>
> Does anyone have any experience with the 17 GB disk drives?  Are there
> performance issues compared to using more drives with smaller capacity?
Are
> there load balancing (% Used as well as % Busy) issues if you mix 4GB /
8GB / 17
> GB drives on the same box?  What if you keep the different types in
separate
> ASP's?
>
> If there are documents or guidelines in this area, I have not been able to
> locate them.
>
> Phil
>
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
> +---
>

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---