.
I am not sure if it is released yet, but IBM is suppose to come
out with an SSA controller that yields 160MB/sec. This is all
find and dandy, but you have to remember that the micro-channel
bus on you R30 is only rated at 160MB/sec. So, if you put one of
those controllers on a bus (there are two buses per board: 0,1),
then it would hose that whole bus. A fast wide diff SCSI bus
is rated at 20MB/sec, but I believe SCSI is a dirty protocol, so
if you can get that out of it, good for you. Anyway I have been
very satisfied with our SSA setups, and if you are worried about
bang for the buck, then it should be noted that SSA's have droped
in price to about equal with their SCSI cousins. The SSA controllers,
however, are a bit pricey.
Debbie Lane wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am preparing to test ADSM 2.1.0.6 with SQL BackTrack 2.2.1. We are using
> the IBM "Magstar" 3494 tape library with two 3590 tape heads, which is
> connected to our ADSM server via fast-wide SCSI. We will be backing up
> four RS6000s model R30 which house Oracle V7 applications, and one
> additional RS6000 model 59H which is our Admin. server, and ADSM server.
> The R30s all have SSA disk, and the 59H has SCSI disk. The RS6000s are on
> a FDDI ring. We are acquiring additional disk, on the 59H, for the ADSM
> DB, for now we will not be using ADSM disk storage pools, backups will go
> directly to tape.
> We want to mirror the ADSM DB, so we are purchasing separate controller
> cards, for the mirrored disk. My question is, will SCSI or SSA give us more
> bang for our buck? It seems to me that I have heard of performance issues
> regarding SCSI disk and ADSM...
> The future holds SAP over Oracle on the RS6000s. If this test is
> satisfactory, we will also use ADSM to backup NT, and SUN servers.
> I am relatively new to this environment (Unix, ADSM and Oracle) any other
> tips for a successful implementation will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Deb
--
Regards,
Regards,
Ben Kokenge
Production Manager, GeoBank USA
713.706.0531
|
