Re: New 525 install and disk protection

[Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Then you are suggesting that larger size is what makes the difference in 
performance?

Kirk Goins wrote:
> I think the consideration here is the fact that the cache on the base 
> raid controller for the CPU is only 40mb. If Joel has one of the newer 
> high performance controllers, they run around 1.5GB of read and write 
> cache. This config put almost all the disk on that larger controller and 
> therefore much better dick performance.
>
>
>
> Urbanek, Marty wrote:
>   
> > Joel,
> >
> > We had a system like that before one could put the load source on RAID
> > (actually still running that system). The hw/sw of the last few years
> > allows us to have the load source on RAIDed drives. I'm not an expert on
> > the subject, but I think RAID would result in slightly less "wasted"
> > disk space. However, I think with the setup you have, you've got your
> > bases covered. We had problems with the mirrored load source before and
> > recovery was accomplished without incident.
> >
> > -Marty
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:50:47 -0400
> > from: "Harvell, Joel" <jbharvell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > subject: 
> >
> > I am installing a new 525 system with 18 total drives.  2 drives are in
> > the system unit, and 16 are in the expansion unit.  These are 70 gig
> > drives.  I have set up Raid 5  on the 16 drives in the expansion unit.
> > I added all the drives to asp 1 and started mirroring.  So the 2 drives
> > in the system unit are mirrored, and the 16 drives in the expansion unit
> > have Raid 5.
> >
> > Does any one see any problems with this setup??  I have never had
> > Mirrored drives before.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Joel B. Harvell
> >
> >   
> >     
>
>