Re: R.A.I.D boxes

>>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
>>mix.

Daniel Jones writes:

>Michael's statement is an exercise in semantics since his unspoken
>assertion is that the assumed deficiencies of RAID 3 and RAID 5 are
>based on uncached implementations....

I have independently emailed Daniel some architectural RAID information that should clear this up. There's much more to the big improvement in RAID 7 performance over the earlier, mid-80s RAID architectures than just the advanced caching techniques. Open, standards-based RAID 7 gets much of its performance increase from its embedded operating system developed by Storage Computer R&D, its powerful built-in central processor (now a Pentium), and its asynchronous architecture. I can go into this in a lot more depth, but I'm off for the airport right now. We are working on a major expansion in the U.K., and I will be working there and in Belgium for the next couple weeks. I can address this topic in more detail when I get back. Meanwhile, people needing various whitepapers on this subject can call Teri Inca here at 603-880-3005. They could also call Mike Brazao next week when he is back from the UK, if a technical discussion is needed.

Mike Willett
Storage Computer Corp.
11 Riverside Street
Nashua, NH 03062
Tel. 603-880-3005
UK: 44 372 376 221 Received on Wed Nov 16 1994 - 20:52:13 CET