× 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.



That's what Larry was explaining. The part number is only reasonable if you
are swapping actual parts, and then not really reliable for that either.
IBM will very occasionally change the part number for a given CCIN/Feature
Code because engineering changes, firmware updates, chassis differences, and
the list goes on. CEs will regularly show up with a different part number
than they are replacing due to engineering changes etc. They know the
correct part numbers to use since they have systems that report all of that.
We as customers do not have access to that database.

While Larry cited an older situation we used to deal with, you just
identified a current part with the same situation.


--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Nathan Andelin
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 7:55 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: For the Technical guys

I just noticed that the part number changed from 01LU575 to 01LU573 for the
283 GB 15K SAS drives - going from Power 8 to Power 9. But the actual drives
appear to be identical.



On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 6:51 AM, DrFranken <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Caution!

The use of part numbers for Power Systems configuration is not a great
idea.

IBM Uses feature codes because the underlying part number can AND DOES
change. This may include sourcing parts from multiple suppliers (they
ALWAYS do this) as well as changes in the part over time. That said
even the feature code can appear to change for the same drive or I/O
adapter but in those cases the change typically indicates a different
mounting configuration. (e.g. Sff-1 Sff-2 or Sff-3 for disk units.)

While it's probable that a part number search will yield results it's
also very probable that it will miss valid results.

A classic was the old 4GB SCSI disk unit. Those things came in more
part numbers than you could shake a stick at. They physically changed from
1.6"
to 1" drives, changed the style of the case completely, embodied maybe
a dozen manufacturers and yet if you had a 6607 it worked! This was
also a good example of finding the same disk unit with different
mounting. These things went into model 400s with NO mounting into 170s
and 620s and 720s with a blue handled sled and into older 3xx and 5xx
models inside a complete enclosure that even had another board in it!


- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.

On 4/26/2018 1:48 AM, Gad Miron wrote:

Thanks Larry, Rob, Diego, Jim, Ed

Point taken, I'll ask the BPs.
(this is 11 such disks in a Raid5 configuration, perhaps not that
bad?)

Googling this drives I only found them (Part No. 00E9953 )
configurable for a P8 machines.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/POWER8/p8ecs/
p8ecs_drive_parts.htm


Do you have the part no. for a Power 9 machine?

Gad

date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:04:47 -0400

from: DrFranken <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: For the Technical guys

They are in the list but don't buy 'em! Even for test and dev those
things are slow. At least get the 15K Drives and a few more of them.
For test and dev you may find that the read intensive SSDs will work
for you also yilding vast leaps in performance at reasonable cost.

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.

On 4/25/2018 8:58 AM, Gad Miron wrote:

Hi Techies.

Looking at (competing) quotes for a new S914 (P9) dev. machine:

one BP configures 1.1TB 10K RPM SAS SSF-3 disks the other BP says
these disks are not configurable for S914 IBM i

machines.


Who is correct?

TIA
Gad



--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take
a moment to review the archives at
https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link:
http://amzn.to/2dEadiD


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.