When performance is bad, do you want to know why? Until we know how to show when the SAN
is impacting your application and how - do you want to trust your production to something
where performance is not manageable?
For example, an ibm controller was benchmarked first as eckd, then as scsi. on eckd, we
get cache stats - could show the dasd fast write filled up, and could show response time.
for scsi, all we could show was thruput was degraded. we can't even measure silly
response time numbers on scsi.
Lionel B. Dyck wrote:
I've heard several good reasons to have my zlinux images use dasd that is
on the fibre connected san and a few for using the old tried and true
dasd. What I'd like to find out is what is true and what isn't - basically
what is considered the best practice for zlinux dasd.
Thus - what do y'all think?
Thanks in advance.
Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist zLinux Platform
Client and Platform Engineering Services (CAPES)
KP-IT Enterprise Engineering, Manager Toni Nicotera
925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck
Kaiser Service Credo: "Our cause is health. Our passion is service. We’re
here to make lives better.”
“Never attribute to malice what can be caused by miscommunication.”
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail,
you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing
its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and
any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
begin:vcard
note:If you can't measure it, I'm just not interested
version:2.1
end:vcard
