Hello list, there are a number of sources that indicate that FCP attached DASD performs better than classic ECKD DASD. My own numbers seem to confirm this. But I am wondering what exactly is the advantage that FCP has over ECKD? I can't be the physical storage box, that is the same for most people, something like a DS8000/DS6000 or a Symmetrix. I can also hardly believe it is the software layer within the storage box, as both FCP and ECKD are emulated/simulated on top of a native storage structure. It could be that the software/hardware interface provided by QDIO is so much better than the old Start-I/O model.
But is it? Is it not just a matter of FCP not spending the cycles to provide stuff that ECKD users take for granted, like: - multipathing - performance instrumentation - device isolation for security reasons - error handling - and more Is it possible that when all the above is added to FCP there is no performance advantage at all? I am sure there are knowledgeable people on the list who have something to comment on this. Thanks for any insights. Best regards, Pieter Harder [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel +31-73-6837133 / +31-6-47272537 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
