Yes. But remember my testes we MBS throughput (backups) not IO (database). I think the results would be the similar, but I have not been able to perform DB IOS tests. Someone also just reminded me that we have a mixture of SATA and FC in our 6140 arrays thus resulting in having to put the 6140 backend in 2GBs and not 4GBs mode. I believe the newer SATA drives don't impose this limitation.
The following is what I remember from a discussion with sun and may not be entirely accurate. The SAS backend on the 2540 allows 4 point to point connections per controller (a switched backed). So two 3+1s one assigned on each controller can transfer data to and from each drive simultaneously in the RAID set. In a Fibre Channel array with a backend arbitrated loop, you have to arbitrate for each drive to talk to the controller and I believe that there are two loops, allowing for only two drive to talk to the controller(s) at a time. So depending on the RAID set size arbitration occurs a number of times with a single RAID set. -- mike cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] 864.650.2577 (cell) 864.656.3809 (office) computing & information technology 340 computer court anderson, sc 29625 > From: Justin Vassallo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Ixaris Systems Ltd > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 15:40:21 +0200 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [storage-discuss] 2x2540 FC vs 1x6140FC > > Mike, Just to double check i am understanding correctly... > > In your tests, the 6140 (with 4G of cache) was slower than the 2540 (w 1G > cache)? > > _______________________________________________ > storage-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss _______________________________________________ storage-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
