home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!slcs.slb.com!BRYDON@128.58.42.3
- From: brydon@asl.slb.com (Harvey Brydon (918)250-4312)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
- Subject: Re: Bound volume sets: are they a bad idea?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov16.135104.23176@slcs.slb.com>
- Date: 16 Nov 92 13:51:04 GMT
- References: <27A00A05_002EA238.009632A7DEFF5100$192_2@UK.AC.KCL.PH.IPG>,<1992Nov10.124211.6220@slcs.slb.com>,<1drjpkINN91n@gap.caltech.edu>
- Sender: news@slcs.slb.com (News Administrator)
- Reply-To: brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com
- Organization: Schlumberger/Anadrill Sugar Land, TX
- Lines: 23
- Nntp-Posting-Host: 129.87.186.2
-
- In article <1992Nov10.124211.6220@slcs.slb.com>, brydon@asl.slb.com (Harvey
- Brydon (918)250-4312) writes:
- >Also, keep in mind that
- >you are taking 2 'large' volumes and making them into one. This effectively
- >increases the size of the cluster factor. If it is 4 on one of these disks,
- >it will be 8 on the volume set ...
-
- Robert Gezelter, Jerry, Carl and a couple of others took me to task on this
- (but not (yet?) Ehud). Two errors on my part. (1) In a volume set, each
- volume has its own bitmap.sys, so a bound volume set does not double the
- cluster size. (2) Even in a volume set or stripe set, everybody else says that
- even though the cluster size can be larger than unity, read/write requests can
- be made for a number of blocks smaller than the cluster size. Sorry for the
- errors. I hang my head in shame.
-
- Obscure biblical quote: "GO TO, let us go down, and there confound their
- language, that they may not understand one another's speech - Genesis 11:7
-
- Disclaimer: I have never been on Prozac.
- _______________________________________________________________
- Harvey Brydon | Internet: brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com
- Dowell Schlumberger | P.O.T.S.: (918)250-4312
- I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
-