Re: disk arms (was RE: Tips for user ASP)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charly Jones" <charly301@hotmail.com>
To: <midrange-l@midrange.com>
Cc: <lbolhuis@arbsol.com>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: disk arms (was RE: Tips for user ASP)

I am not a manager.  But I have met a few.  And very few of the ones I've
met would be willing (or able) to actually follow through on the
consequences of what I believe you have proposed.  If you (and your
managers, to say nothing of the CFO) were willing to cut in half the
"storage threshold" value and forever and always not allow your systems to
go above 45% disk used (assuming that the threshold was 90% before), then I
would almost agree with you.  There are _some_ performance reasons to prefer
a 90% full 4 gigabyte drive over a 45% full 8 gigabyte drive.  You can think
of it as the performance "sweet spot" on the disk.  Especially if you have
RAID enabled.  But I don't really think very many folks are using RAID, are
they?

[bruce] eek. Charlie... every customer I have (save one) is raided. The one
that is not (believe it or not) is fully mirrored. As for the arms, you hit
the problem squarely. No one, not even programmers, is able to look at a
disk that is 20% full and think they need more arms.


===========================================================
R. Bruce Hoffman, Jr.
 -- IBM Certified Specialist - iSeries Administrator
 -- IBM Certified Specialist - RPG IV Developer

"There is a crack in everything,
  that's how the light gets in.
    - Leonard Cohen