Re: performance of internal vs san for 7TB -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Steve Pavlichek
<spavlichek@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on
Tue, 02 Jun 2015 15:13:58 GMT:

Best way to confirm acceptable performance would be to use
Disk Magic. Short cut would be to request to have the same
number of disk drives (Physical drives, not LUNs), same speed
(15k or 10k) and that they be dedicated drives, not shared
with other hosts. It is also important when they configure
the LUNs to present to the LPARs, that the LUNs are similar in
size and quantity to your physical disk configuration.

Disk Magic only supports IBM storage. No mention of the vendor
for SAN storage has been made.

Depending on %full, more physical disk devices may be required
in the SAN due to drives per parity set and hot spare
requirements.

Sharing the arrays in the SAN may or may not have an impact on
results. If not sharing reduces the number of drives backing
the LUN significantly, this may result in poorer performance.

Similar size isn't a requirement. Similar quantity is advised,
which is likely to translate to similar size.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.