RE: Performance of large LF access path builds - SSD vs 10K spinny -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: RE: Performance of large LF access path builds - SSD vs 10K spinny
From: Sue Baker <sue.baker@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:33:18 +0000 (UTC)
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/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:16:03 GMT:

Has 7.2 changed this? Meaning, have they added intelligence
to the OS that if the units are all SSDs then it will
automatically use the increased thread support?

Yes, things are different in 7.2 and I've been told by
development UNIT(*SSD) is no longer required for 100% SSD
configurations.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: Performance of large LF access path builds - SSD vs 10K spinny , rob

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.