Re: Disk subsystem configuration

[Larry Bolhuis <lbolhui@xxxxxxx>]

Roman,

  I would suggest Option 2. The larger number of fast disks handling all of the
OS and Bank System I/O would typically result in the best throughput.  The
developers and testing won't be hut much by the slower disks.

  Is the Load Source unit currently a "Fast" disk?  If it is not then you will
have some fun getting the system re-configured that way.

  - Larry

Roman Amosov wrote:
> 
>     I have 2 sets of DASD units - 12 "slow"  7,2k RPM 4,3 Gb units (SPD IOPs) 
>and 52 "fast" 10k RPM 8 GB units (PCI IOPs). Which configuration would be more 
>effective from performance point of view:
> 1. System ASP with 12 "slow" disks and our bank system installed in user ASP 
>with 52 "fast" disks.
> 2. System ASP with 52 "fast" disks and bank system installed in it and "slow" 
>user ASP with any test, development etc. libraries.
> ???

-- 
Larry Bolhuis         |         What if it's True?
Arbor Solutions, Inc  |
(616) 451-2500        |  
(616) 451-2571 -fax   | 
lbolhui@ibm.net       |
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---