Re: [OT] EMC as a performance system (was Re: Install and RAID)
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 02:43:30AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:08:25PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > EMC does not supply mega I/O bandwidth. A standard EMC has two
> > physical channels between it and the system it supports and, on the
> > far side the cache controller, has nothing better than SCSI-2
> > connecting disk strings together. It also, as someone else mentioned,
> > uses very large drive sizes making any sort of data partioning next to
> > impossible.
>
> I don't know what model you worked with, but the Symmetrix I worked with had
> 8 SCSI channels (2 4-channel cards) with room for 8 more. You could also put
> 2-channel fibre-channel cards in for a total of 8 fibre-channel interfaces.
> These channels could be bound together on the host via a program called EMC
> Powerpath. And this was a lower-end EMC. (It only had around 300 gigs)
If you want real fast disc, and lots of it - the HP XP512 (or the ICL
equivalent since they make it...) beats the EMC kit hands down - and
it has fewer single points of failure too.
Hard to configure and get your head round though...
But for redunancy and availability (especially in disaster type
scenarios) Software RAID still rules the roost. With money to throw
around, I'd software mirror accross two sites with two XPs doing raid5.
We might even be doing that soon...
--
Regards, Paul
Reply to: