> I  don't  see  how  it's  possible  to  get  better  performance  by
> aggregating  all  of  the disks and then partitioning them out.

It's  not  that you always get better performance by aggregating, it's
that  you  _don't_  always get better performance the other way, while
always adding complexity.

If 'Application 1' and 'Application 2' have exactly identical disk I/O
demands,  creating  identical  dedicated  arrays  'RAID 1 Array 1' and
'RAID  1  Array  2'  can  be  considered  to  have  basically the same
performance  as  one RAID 10 array, albeit with surplus complexity. If
'Application   1'  and  'Application  2'  have  asymmetrical  demands,
however, that setup rewards one unnecessarily and punishes the other.

In  another message, I noted situations in which separate arrays would
be preferable.

> I  always  thought the rule was to separate logical processes across
> separate  spindles  whenever possible and practical.

I'd  phrase  the  rule  "Give  as  many  spindles  as possible to each
independent  function,"  so  in  some cases the spindles may be shared
between  functions, but each function can use more of them, which both
limits  contention by concurrent processes and also enables a function
to perform optimally when there is no contention (i.e. asymmetry).

But  I  think  the  rule is really less a hardware requirement than an
_awareness_  requirement--what you'll do when you have the need and/or
money.  It's  essential to realize what the current/future bottlenecks
might  be  on a server, even if you don't take action right now, which
means  dissecting  the  applications  you  currently run and those you
might pop in.

> Kind of like the *nix people bashing the M$ people.

Kind of like the term 'M$'...:o)

--Sandy


------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

SpamAssassin plugs into Declude!
    http://www.mailmage.com/download/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/Release/

---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]

---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.

Reply via email to