HP3000-L Archives

August 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:
"Michael D. Hensley" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Michael D. Hensley
Date:
Thu, 1 Aug 1996 21:11:54 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
On or about Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:58:06 GMT, [log in to unmask] (Wayne
Burke) wrote:
 
 
>Anyone have any ideas if I would see any improvement by
>splitting my devices to be 6 per controller card ?
 
Since the card is one (potential) bottleneck, splitting the load
evenly between two cards might improve disc i/o.
 
HOWEVER, dividing the number of discs between the two cards is not as
important as dividing the i/o's.  In other words, what if most i/o's
go to the 6 discs on one card, and few(er) got to the 6 discs on the
other card?  You need to measure i/o's per drive to determine the
correct way to split the drives.
 
Finally, (plug, sort of), you should investigate disc fragmentation as
a possible cause of excessive disc i/o (it's the most common problem
we've seen), and use a defrag tool (see our web page at
http://www.lund.com for details) to solve the problem.
 
---
Michael D. Hensley           | [log in to unmask] (personal)
Software Development Manager | [log in to unmask]     (business)
Lund Performance Solutions   | http://www.lund.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2