LUSE or RAID 0

[mghosalk]

We added a single 146 GB array group to our XP48 and plan to direct attach a couple of windows 2003 hosts. Using RAID5 + OPEN-9 i am getting 7gb per lun and wanted some suggestions on how to provide this space to the windows hosts.

1. should i luse multiple luns to give a 100gb drive to the windows host OR should i use software raid0 to stripe mutiple luns to get a decent size drive for windows.

2. from a overall performace perspective, what is better? Software raid for grouping multiple luns on the windows server or luse on the xp48.

3. is autopath xp a requirement for redundant fiber channel cards for load balancing on Windows 2003 hosts?

Thanks
Mandar

[V.Tamilvanan · Accepted solution]

Hi,

From overall Performance perspective Luse LUNS are better than software raid 0 as software raid consumes the resource of your Host system which is limited than XP48.
If you want to Load Balance across redundant fiber channel then AutoPath XP is a must.

[Alzhy]

HP's XP line are actually Hitachi frames with some HP customizations (mostly software). Yes LUSE luns (either RAID0 or RAID5) are way much faster than your server's RAID management. On the real Hitachi frames, I can multi-path LUNs so that a LUN appears on more than one HBA.. from your server -- you can then use whatever pathing software there is... If AutoPath is not your choice, then you may tale a close look at Veritas Volume Manager where DMP is there for your load balancing and path failover.

HTH.