Re: Sizing - RAC, storage subsystem EMC

Ah yes, of course. The law of bigger numbers. Unfortunately, IBM call their Shart RAID 53...

Stephane Faroult wrote:

>Rachel Carmichael wrote:
>
>
>>It's much easier for the CTO and CIO to understand something like RAC
>>(You won't lose your application) than "we need more disks to do RAID
>>10 instead of RAID 5 because the performance etc is better"
>>
>>I think I'm going to work on a paper on "reality checks" :)
>>
>>
>>
>
>Perhaps that the trick is to call RAID 10 'RAID ten' instead of 'RAID
>zero plus one'. It will look twice better than RAID 5 to bean-counters.
>
>
>

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mogens_N=F8rgaard?=
  INET: mln_at_miracleas.dk

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).