Sorry, I should have said the fast write cache failed. It failed twice
within a three week period.
Andy Carlson |\ _,,,---,,_
andyc AT andyc.carenet DOT org ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
BJC Health System |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri '---''(_/--' `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Miles Purdy wrote:
> That really seems odd. LV's and not even array's are tied to and adapter, or
> you wouldn't be able to move VG's between servers. Even if an adapter fails,
> you can move the fast write cache to a new card and the cache will commit any
> writes! Again seems odd.
>
> Miles
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Miles Purdy
> System Manager
> Farm Income Programs Directorate
> Winnipeg, MB, CA
> purdym AT fipd.gc DOT ca
> ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >>> andyc AT ANDYC.CARENET DOT ORG 23-Apr-01 3:32:26 PM >>>
> We only had one card. I can't tell you exactly why we lost it. The
> raid came up offline, and after hours on the phone with IBM, they said
> basically, that I was screwed, the raid was toast.
>
> Andy Carlson |\ _,,,---,,_
> andyc AT andyc.carenet DOT org ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
> BJC Health System |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
> St. Louis, Missouri '---''(_/--' `-'\_)
> Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
>
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Vibhute, Bandu wrote:
>
> > How did you lost database ? We are running some of databases in RAID-5, if
> > two cards lost means it's threat to our data . After replacing SAA-Ada did
> > you lost disks also?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Bandu Vibhute,
> > Bestfoods Baking Company,
> > 55 Paradise Lane, Bay Shore, NY, 11706
> > Voice: 631-951-5212, Cell: 516-702-0323
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Carlson [mailto:andyc AT ANDYC.CARENET DOT ORG]
> > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 10:03 AM
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject: Re: RAID-5 Vs Mirroring
> >
> >
> > One comment about the raid - we got away from SSA hardware raid after we
> > had two SSA card failures that caused the loss of the database. If I
> > were forced to use raid, I would have the second copy, and put the raids
> > on separate SSA cards.
> >
> > Andy Carlson |\ _,,,---,,_
> > andyc AT andyc.carenet DOT org ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
> > BJC Health System |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
> > St. Louis, Missouri '---''(_/--' `-'\_)
> > Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
> >
> > On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Mahesh Babbar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Environment:
> > >
> > > NSM 3466, RS 6000, AIX 4.3.2 , TSM version 3.7.4,
> > >
> > > 12 x 18.2 GB disk ( for DB and Diskpool Volumes)
> > >
> > > My current DB is of 80 GB size and is alarmingly utililized ( 95
> > > %).The DB volulmes are mirrored inside TSM ( Second Copy).
> > >
> > > Therefore another 80 GB space is being used for the second copies. In
> > > order to have more usable space for DB, a suggestion has been mooted
> > > to go for RAID-5 at the hardware level.
> > >
> > > IBM's version is that since a second copy MUST be kept , going for
> > > RAID 5 shall require more disk space. Now my question is:
> > >
> > > 1. With the RAID 5 at AIX level, should a second, synchronized copy
> > > of DB volumes is required.
> > >
> > > 2. If I do not keep a second copy and take daily full backup, would
> > it
> > > be RISKY.
> > >
> > > 3. Configuring RAID 5 at this juncture, would anybody see any pitfall
> > > ahead.
> > >
> > > Any comments are welcome!
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > MAhesh
> > >
> >
> >
> > "WorldSecure Server <baking.bestfoods.com>" made the following
> > annotations on 04/23/01 11:30:20
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> > The origin of this electronic mail message was the Internet.
> > Bestfoods Baking cannot validate the authenticity
> > of the sender and therefore cannot be held accountable
> > for any content within.
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> > "WorldSecure Server <baking.bestfoods.com>" made the following
> > annotations on 04/23/01 15:05:43
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message may contain confidential and trade secret information of
> > Bestfoods Baking, and be subject to the Economic Espionage Act of 1996. For
> > recipient's use only. If you have received this message in error, please
> > delete immediately, and alert the sender.
> >
> > =======================================================
> >
>
|
