Re: Is there a performance advantage of adding a second parity set? -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Is there a performance advantage of adding a second parity set?
From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:18:29 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Since I just lost two drives on Saturday night (Thank God they were on two
different raid sets!) I am strongly leaning towards a new raid set. And
your performance question was what got my boss thinking.

My BP said he's seen nothing one way or another. He also said "Raid set
sizes are minimum 3 drives and maximum is 18. You can run up to 5 Raid
Sets on a disk controller."

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.