Bruce, Your company is a NetApp Salesman's dream. Even mirrored pairs don't protect you against double disk errors in the same pair. I would recommend you look at implementing mirrored raid groups on local drives. This is done at driver level and is not to be confused with snap mirror. Under this scenario your traditional raid-4 groups, 4-7 drives each, are driver mirrored to another raid-4 group on the same machine. No TCP-IP involvement. With this scenario you can survive a triple disk failure. You need slightly more disk than straight mirrored pairs but you get performance, complete off-line volumes that are still raid protected, etc.... Re-syncing is pretty straight forward too when you break the local mirror and join them again. This feature/scenario is one of NetApp's key metro recovery features.
The only thing you need now is a can full of money....
Hunter M. Wylie 21193 French Prairie Rd Suite 100 St. Paul, Oregon 97137-9722 Bus: 866-367-8900 FAX: 503-633-8901 Cell: 503-880-1947
-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Arden Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:02 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Mirroring using raidsize=2
Our company (in its wisdom) has decided that all "critcal" data must be on mirrored filesystems, not on raid.
On filers, if you set the raidsize to 2, you effectively get a mirrored volume.
Does anyone do this? Does it cause a performance problem? Is there a limit on the number of raid groups in a volume?
- Bruce