<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues in Operating System - HP-UX</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430154#M767747</link>
    <description>We do not use our AutoRaids for Progress databases instead we use Oracle. Are there any specific problems/questions?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Brian&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;lt;*(((&amp;gt;&amp;lt; er</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:41:46 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Brian M. Fisher</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2000-07-11T16:41:46Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430153#M767746</link>
      <description>is there anyone using autoraid 12H for a Progress Database system</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:54:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430153#M767746</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francisco Lopez_2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2000-07-11T15:54:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430154#M767747</link>
      <description>We do not use our AutoRaids for Progress databases instead we use Oracle. Are there any specific problems/questions?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Brian&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;lt;*(((&amp;gt;&amp;lt; er</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:41:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430154#M767747</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brian M. Fisher</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2000-07-11T16:41:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430155#M767748</link>
      <description>I am not familiar with "AutoRaid 12H". But as I recall Progress is only compatible with raid level 0 or 1. And you must use the Progress backup routine!</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:32:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430155#M767748</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jennifer Chiarelli</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2000-07-11T17:32:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430156#M767749</link>
      <description>To answer to Lanny: you probably mis-recall ;-) From HP-UX point of view, thus from the database point of view, data is on a disk device (either a filesystem or a raw device). This device could even be a Logical Volume, which in turn in on a disk device. In any case, what HP-UX sees as being a Physical Volume (the /dev/dsk/c0t5d2) is actually a SCSI LUN on the AutoRAID box (or another RAID box, such as the FC/30 or the FC/60). The LUN is spread on multiple disk mechanisms using a RAID scheme. But the operating system (and thus the applications) cannot "see" those disk mechs. Thus it does not care for it wether you are using RAID 0, RAID 1, or whatever.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Hope it helps, Emmanuel</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2000 06:14:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430156#M767749</guid>
      <dc:creator>Emmanuel Eyer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2000-07-12T06:14:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: AutoRAID and Progress Database Performance issues</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430157#M767750</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We use Progress with the filesystems on the AutoRAID 12H, together with MC/ServiceGuard. &lt;BR /&gt;In the database there are put 1600 transactions per hour (smal records of about 132 characters long). There are nog problems with the disk access. &lt;BR /&gt;Only CPU was an issue, but now with 2 CPU's on our K370 it works fine.&lt;BR /&gt;Note that the AutoRAID 12H uses one SCSI interface as standard path. You have to make another LUN and define the alternate path different, see pvchange(1M), to get full benefit of two SCSI interfaces to your AutoRAID 12H.&lt;BR /&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Andre van der Laarse</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2000 05:03:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/autoraid-and-progress-database-performance-issues/m-p/2430157#M767750</guid>
      <dc:creator>Andre van der Laarse</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2000-07-13T05:03:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

