Re: Bit off topic : It should go faster than this...

"Ralph" <rlro99_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e2c49cae.0306130048.282a99f4_at_posting.google.com...

> Each of the 5300 controllers is connected to two enclosures by four
> channels. So all the '0' side of the array is in once shelf connected
> by two channels, the '1' side of the array is connected to the same
> controller using the other two channels.

Sorry, I don't get it. Is it one single 5300 controller with 4 channels, used 2 to each enclosure? Or is it two 5300 controllers, each with 2 channels, each 5300 to each enclosure?

Also: do me a favour and check those channel connections and that they are the right way around, as in "what they told you"? ;)

>
> According to compaqs proposal document each of these channels is
> capable of 160mb/s giving 320mb/s to each enclosure. According to our
> NT systems people there is no way to configure which channel to the
> enclosure controls what disks in that enclosure.

That's strange. Because for Raid 0, the controller MUST know which disk is next in the stripe set. There must be some logical translation going on inside the enclosures?

>
> What I am trying to get across to them this that it really should go
> faster than this as it is and that something is broken/misconfigured
> etc.

Something else: what and how are you copying? Is it just a normal folder with 2Gb size and umpteen files in it? Drag and drop? Or is it just one single file of 2Gb size?

>
> Thanks you your help with this.

Pleasure. Not much help so far, just following your train of thought.

--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam