Just to throw out more bait....

Why not do *ahem* hardware mirroring from the adapter via raid 1 as opposed
to Raid 5?  Raid 5 isn't always the best choice, especially if you're
dealing with only a couple of drives.

It seems to me the topic in the past has always been ADSM Mirroring vs. AIX
Mirroring,  not ADSM Mirroring vs. hardware mirroring.  IMHO, If I had to
choose between ADSM Mirroring and hardware mirroring, I'd take the hardware
mirroring - you're reducing processor and planar overhead.  If I had to
choose between ADSM mirroring and AIX mirroring, I'd take ADSM.  I've
watched ADSM recover from a dead, mirrored  quite gracefully, and I've
watched AIX die a horrible death from a dead, mirrored disk quite uglily (is
that a word?).  I know others may have different observations, bet hey, what
I've seen with my own eyes probably clouds my judgement.... :)

BTW, Terminology is a function of the people who interpret it.  Most of the
IT industry accepts the term *hardware* mirroring to be defined as mirroring
done on the adapter level.  Sure, it's run by software sitting on the
adapter, but hey, as you said, it's a heck of a lot closer to the hardware
than ADSM, and that's a heck of a lot closer to hardware than most people
would like to get, so using the term *hardware* works in my books.

Now it's time for me to duck....<d'oh!>

later,

Paul