Re: R.A.I.D boxes

D. Linford in Canada writes:

>Are you saying that if you *did* post benchmarks, that you
>couldn't resist making misleading or fraudulent claims?

Hello Mr/Ms. Linford,

Thanks for your question. Let me be more clear.

Our big customers insist on showing themselves at their own sites with their own hardware configurations (with their own OS releases and their own application releases) exactly what their particular performance multiple increase is going to be by installing a 400 GB RAID 7 storage server, for example. They usually don't want to rely on performance information provided by any storage vendor itself, not just us. Along with their own onsite, real-world performance measurements, systems administrators typically want to read up on the theoretical basis for the performance multiple improvements, and we provide that with various technical reports.

RAID 3 fails on small reads and small writes and RAID 5 handles large and small writes poorly, while RAID 7 consistently outperforms the single spindle rate. The RAID 7 performance multiple increase over RAID 3 and RAID 5 is a function of the small read/small write/large write mix.

Mike Willett
Storage Computer Corp.
11 Riverside Street
Nashua, NH 03062
Tel. 603-880-3005 Received on Thu Nov 10 1994 - 22:53:50 CET