> From: thelastman@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Expected performance difference between two configurations
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:36:24 -0700
> To: rvandolson@esri.com
> CC: toasters@teaparty.net
>
> I'm usually in the camp of more spindles is better then not enough. Spindles tend to dictate performance more then the controller does, in most cases, but not all.
>
> Typed with my thumbs!
>
> > On Sep 13, 2013, at 12:28 PM, Ray Van Dolson <rvandolson@esri.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all;
> >
> > Am trying to understand what sort of performance difference I might see
> > between two different configurations:
> >
> > 1) IBM N6240 E21 (FAS3240C) w/ 120x600GB 15K 3.5" SAS and 512GB of
> > flash cache
> > 2) IBM N6250 E26 w/ 80x900GB 10K 2.5" SAS and 512GB of flash cache.
> >
> > Sorry, on the latter I don't know the equivalent FAS. Probably
> > FAS3250C?
> >
> > We have fewer spindles, but newer, beefier controllers.
> >
> > Our workload is primarily VMware via NFS. Lotsa random reads and
> > writes (more on the read side) with I'd say the bulk of the IO requests
> > in the 64KB+ range.
> >
> > Will I regret going with fewer spindles?
> >
> > Ray
> > _______________________________________________
> > Toasters mailing list
> > Toasters@teaparty.net
> > http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters
>
> _______________________________________________
> Toasters mailing list
> Toasters@teaparty.net
> http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters