Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape
2002-02-21 17:02:58
Joshua,
I've heard this before, but I couldn't find anyone at IBM to confirm it.
SO.........
I've been running tape and dasd thru the same FC adapter for about a year
now. Traffic goes from rs6k to an IBM2109 (brocade) switch and then splits
from there. I suspect the switch is handling the arbirated loop (3590) and
point to point (ess aka shark) communication conversions.
Gotchas?
Al Barth
Zurich Scudder Investments
"Joshua S.
Bassi" To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
<[email protected] cc:
OM> Subject: Re: Bad performance with
FC attached disk and tape
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<ADSM-L AT VM DOT MAR
IST.EDU>
02/21/02 12:56
PM
Please respond
to "ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
Not only is sending disk and tape data across the same FC card a bad
idea, I believe IBM doesn't even support that configuration.
--
Joshua S. Bassi
Joshua S. Bassi
Sr. Solutions Architect @ rs-unix.com
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (415) 215-0326
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Daniel Sparrman
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Wu, Jie
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape,
Allen Barth <=
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Seay, Paul
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Bill Mansfield
- Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Daniel Sparrman [mailto:daniel.sparrman
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, ADSM : Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, ADSM : Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, Allen Barth [mailto:allen_barth
- Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape, ADSM : Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L
|
|
|