From: Renison, Rick (rick.renison@EDS.COM)
Date: Sun Jun 01 2003 - 23:53:52 EDT
re: "they want to move away from SSA."
Now THATS an interesting comment. ;)
Anybody else have any comments/rumours in this? We have been standardizing
on SSA. It seems to be fast, shareable, and easy to swap disks.
TIA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VINCENT D'ANTONIO D'ANTONIO [mailto:dantoniov@COMCAST.NET]
> Sent: June 1, 2003 7:52 AM
> To: aix-l@Princeton.EDU
> Subject: Re: FastT600 vs SSA
>
>
> I love the the FastT disk, dirt cheap and can outpreform even ESS if
> configured right. I also like the you can make changes for tuning on
> the fly and see the gain/loss right away. It is much more flexible
> that way. I even had an IBM'er preformace person do some testing and
> now he is all FastT. I think IBM is pushing FastT because I heard and
> cant find anything to back it up with, is that they want to move away
> from SSA.
>
> Going with FastT you can go wrong, and I would also use at least two
> HBA's or more.
>
> just my 2 cents.
> Vince
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: -ray <ray@OPS.SELU.EDU>
> Date: Saturday, May 31, 2003 3:57 am
> Subject: FastT600 vs SSA
>
> > All,
> >
> > We're adding another database to our production s80 and were
> > looking at
> > getting another 7133 SSA drawer, two more SSA cards, and 8
> 36g drives.
> > Our reseller asked if i'd looked at the new FastT600 drawer
> > (single FC
> > drawer). i'd put two FC HBA's in the s80 and attach FastT600
> > directly.He said performance would be comparable, maybe even
> > better than SSA. And
> > the FastT drives are much cheaper than SSA. What are ya'lls
> > thoughts on SSA vs the FastT600. thanks...
> >
> > -ray
> > --
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > =-=
> > Ray DeJean
> http://www.r-a-y.org
> > Systems Engineer Southeastern Louisiana
> University
> > IBM Certified Specialist AIX Administration,
> AIX Support
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > =-=
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 22:16:53 EDT