> If I'm reading the original post correctly, the biggest issue is > likely to be that the 14 disks on each 2Gbit fibre channel will be > throttled to 200Mb/s by the channel , when in fact you could expect > (in RAID 10 > arrangement) to get about 7 * 70 Mb/s = 490 Mb/s. > The two controllers and two FC switches/hubs are intended for redundancy, rather than performance, so there's only one 2Gbit channel. I > don't know if its possible to use both in parallel to get better performance. > I believe it's possible to join two or more FC ports on the switch together, but as there's only port going to the controller internally this presumably wouldn't help. > There are two SCSI U320 buses, with seven bays on each. I don't know what the overhead of SCSI is, but you're obviously not going to get > 490MB/s for each set of seven even if the FC could do it. Darn. I was really looking forward to ~500Mb/s :( > Of course your database may not spend all day doing sequential scans one at a time over 14 disks, so it doesn't necessarily matter... That's probably true, but *knowing* that the max seq scan speed is that high gives you some confidence (true or fake) that the hardware will be sufficient the next 2 years or so. So, if dual 2GBit FC:s still don't deliver more than 200Mb/s, what does? -Mikael
