Thank you for all the answers to my posting. There were numerous negative
experiences concerning the batch performance. This couldn't be  refuted by HP.
So we have decided to expand our disk capacity with a HASS and JBODs now and to
go to a saver disk system later.

Unfortunately the most part of the answers came by eMail and not into the
newsgroup. This was not intended by me. Is there a reason in my posting,
perhaps because it's startet by AOL? I can't see any.

Gerhard Gross
HALBERG GUSS GmbH
Kirchstr. 16
D-66130 Saarbrücken
[log in to unmask]

>We plan to buy an AutoRAID 12H to use it with our productive ERP (that means
>not our test systems). The vendor told us that the I/O performance would be
>as
>least as good as now with our simple disks, but in the meanwhile I've read
>other things here in the newgroup. Especially I am alarmed for a special
>I/O-intensive batch which fits for the night; it would be bad if he needed 10
>%
>more time.
>
>We have seen that the 12H could run with RAID-1, because our productive data
>is
>less than the half of it's raw capacity.
>
>--> Therefore, above all, I am interested in the difference of the
>12H-performance compared with the performance of simple disks.
>
>A HASS with full mirrored disks, two SCSI-controlers and MirrorDisk/iX would
>be
>more expensive than the 12H that we could buy.
>
>As we need more disk capacity now, we would buy some simple disks now and
>would
>transit to a mirrored system later, if the performance risk were too high.
>
>The details: Now in our 939KS with 70 users we have one F/W-SCSI-Controler
>with
>3 9GB disks, 1 4GB disk and 5 2GB disks, totally 41GB. The AutoRAID has 8 9GB
>disks; we want retain the 4 biggest old disks for the test systems and
>similar;
>the productive MPE accounts for the 12H need 20-25GB.
>
>Who could image how performance will change, or could give advise?
>
>Thank you very much.