[aprssig] Re: More on the findU server issue...

[Gerry Creager N5JXS]

Overall, RAID 10 would be preferable, and using some of the newer, 
larger, 16 MB cache drives.

gerry

Keith - VE7GDH wrote:
> Steve K4HG wrote on Sept 25 2005
> ...
> 
>> It is therefore dependent on the seek time of the disk, and more
>> importantly the latency. The primary server's 15k RPM disks
>> will have half the latency of the 7200 RPM drives in the backup.
> 
> 
> Sorry if it has been mentioned before, but are you using stand-along 
> hard drives for findu.com, or are they set up as a RAID? For most 
> people, RAID 1 for would be more important because of the redundancy it 
> would provide, but I wonder if RAID 0, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 (dunno which 
> would be best for findu.com) would be better because of the faster 
> access times... or are you already using RAID 0+1 so you have both 
> mirroring and striping?
> 
> 73 es cul - Keith VE7GDH
> -- 
> "I may be lost, but I know exactly where I am!"
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843