HP3000-L Archives

March 1999, 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:
"Craig S." <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 2 Mar 1999 01:05:46 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
Volume sets can be both a benefit and a headache when it comes to
performance.

The concern I have based on you below discussion is the number of
spindles per controller as well as the location of master vs.
associated details on the drives.

Splitting the database across volume sets has it benefits if done in
an organized fashion taking advantage of evening up the I/O over the
existing controllers.

Feel free to contact us with any specific questions.

Craig S.

Craig L. Solomon
Manager of Information & Consulting Services
Lund Performance Solutions / Lund Consulting Services
Consulting / Training / Technical Support
Phone: 541-926-3800 / Mobile: 503-580-5127
http://www.lund.com  Pager: 888-694-1819
[log in to unmask] -Work    |    [log in to unmask] - Home


On Mon, 1 Mar 1999 13:14:19 -0500 , Jeff Mikolai <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>I am having a discussion about private volumes and performance issues. I
>have a relatively large account with 3 large databases. At one point in
>time, these three databases have been split across 3 private volumes. Now
>they all reside on one private volume. According to HP back when we did
>this, they said this would not be a performance issue. Could someone
>enlighten me on this issue a bit.
>
>Thank you,
>Jeff Mikolai

ATOM RSS1 RSS2