<?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 2 seperate arrays vs 1 large array in Disk Enclosures</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/2-seperate-arrays-vs-1-large-array/m-p/2597714#M3034</link>
    <description>I have a 5300 dual channel controller in a server with two drive cages that hold 4 18GB drives each.  Each cage has a dedicated channel.  The array configuration utility by default wants to take both channels and drives and make one large array with 8 drives.  If I go the custom route I can make two arrays of 4 drives each each with their own controller. &lt;BR /&gt; &lt;BR /&gt;What configuration is the best for performance?</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2001 23:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ayman Altounji</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2001-10-18T23:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>2 seperate arrays vs 1 large array</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/2-seperate-arrays-vs-1-large-array/m-p/2597714#M3034</link>
      <description>I have a 5300 dual channel controller in a server with two drive cages that hold 4 18GB drives each.  Each cage has a dedicated channel.  The array configuration utility by default wants to take both channels and drives and make one large array with 8 drives.  If I go the custom route I can make two arrays of 4 drives each each with their own controller. &lt;BR /&gt; &lt;BR /&gt;What configuration is the best for performance?</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2001 23:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/disk-enclosures/2-seperate-arrays-vs-1-large-array/m-p/2597714#M3034</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ayman Altounji</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2001-10-18T23:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

