HP3000-L Archives

March 1996, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Chad Gilles <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Chad Gilles <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 1 Mar 1996 08:40:31 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
KLRenk wrote:
>
> I have heard and seen articles about just making LDEV 1 the only volume in
> the system volume set and creating a different volume set for the rest.
> What is this groups feelings on segregating LDEV 1.   Is it worth it?
>
> I am in the process of upgrading our hp3000 to 939ks and deciding whether
> or not to do it.   LDEV 1 is a 2db drive.  Any thoughts would be
> appreciated....
 
We have two HP3000 995-500 machines with over 120Gb of disk space, and
using volume sets is very valuable. We currently utilize 9 different
volume sets. Our system VS is 5 2GB drives, but we keep quite a bit of
additional data on that VS, we are in the process of changing that. I am
a BIG supporter of using volume sets. It costs you a little in overhead
for volume management and some disk space, but with the questionable
reliability (read factory suggested field repair procedures) of the 2GB
disk drives, using volume sets can save you many hours of downtime due to
reloads.
  It may not be as valuable for machines with smaller disk
configurations, because the time for reloads would not be as long.
For our shop, volume sets are essential. If systems availablity is
important to your site I would suggest using volume sets.
 
Chad 'I got rid of Compu$erve' Gilles
American United Life
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2