|
Rob, Arms are arms, and on a database transaction system they frequently are the most significant limiting factor on performance. In the case of currently marketed or announced disk drives for the iSeries, the 8.5 GB and 17 GB drives have the same performance metrics. My point was practical, as opposed to theoretical. For those transaction-based systems which have excess capacity using 8.5 GB drives because disk-arm count was a performance limiting factor, they will need to purchase the same number of 17 GB drives to duplicate the same performance. Those systems will save no money based on the price reduction of the 17 GB drives. Yes, they will have capacity to archive data, keep more history, and other good stuff; but they will not save money. IBM may announce new hardware which makes your point, but as of this time, they have not. Regards, Andy Nolen-Parkhouse > Subject: RE: iSeries Disk Pricing > > This is a multipart message in MIME format. > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Everybody keeps chanting the arms mantra as if a bank of original 10mb IBM > PC hard drives would out perform a 8gb iSeries drive. I argue that if > they keep improving all of the other performance metrics of drives then > you may not need as many arms for the same amount of data. > > Rob Berendt
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.