RE: Back to the RAID question -- PCTECH

× 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.

Subject: RE: Back to the RAID question
From: "Jones, John \(US\)" <John.Jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 11:38:41 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/pctech>
List-help: <mailto:pctech-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: PC Technical Discussion for iSeries Users <pctech.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:pctech@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/pctech>, <mailto:pctech-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/pctech>, <mailto:pctech-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Joe, can you link to those cards?  320 sounds more like the SCSI speed
than a cache amount.

BTW, have you given any consideration to a non-IBM RAID card?  LSI makes
some nice ones (better than Adaptec).
http://www.lsilogic.com/products/megaraid/index.html  You server
probably only has 1 PCI/PCI-E/PCI-X slot, but I doubt you've any other
use for it.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: Back to the RAID question , Joe Pluta

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.