[THIN] IBM BladeCenter & FastT-700 Performance.

  • From: "Taylor, George" <gtaylor@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:25:20 -0600

Just curious on other's thoughts on performance of different scenarios
on the BladeCenter and FastT running together.
What I am doing is booting our W2K server blades from the FastT and
using the left over on-board IDE drive simply for the paging file.  What
I'm not sure about would be the optimal drive setup on the fast, two
options I'm considering:

1. Simple RAID-1, cut it into 2 LUNs and present it to 1 server.  (C: &
D: drives)
2. A LARGE RAID-5, (up to 14 drives) cut it into many LUNs and present
them to several servers, (C: & D: drive for each server)

Obviously on a small scale a single RAID-1 presented to a single server
is going to have less I/O contention than the RAID-5, however as we
increase the number of spindles, say a full 14, in a big RAID-5 does the
I/O contention between servers drop to equal to or better than the
RAID-1?

Any thoughts, or for those that are running in a SAN environment how did
you decide on your design?

Thanks,

George

********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients
Neoware makes computing open, secure, reliable, 
affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com 
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or 
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm

Other related posts:

  • » [THIN] IBM BladeCenter & FastT-700 Performance.