From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stan Hoeppner Subject: Re: high throughput storage server? Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:48:36 -0600 Message-ID: <4D5DEC14.80907@hardwarefreak.com> References: <4D5D017B.50109@anonymous.org.uk> <4D5D9758.2080400@hardwarefreak.com> <4D5D9D70.9010603@gmail.com> <4D5DB3F3.8050209@hardwarefreak.com> <4D5DB7E8.1020003@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4D5DB7E8.1020003@gmail.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Landman Cc: John Robinson , Matt Garman , Mdadm List-Id: linux-raid.ids Joe Landman put forth on 2/17/2011 6:06 PM: > See above. If you want to argue semantics, be my guest, I won't be > party to such a waste of time. The OP is doing analysis that requires a > high performance architecture. The architecture you suggested is not > one people in the field would likely recommend. We don't actually know what the OP's needs are at this point. Any suggestion is an educated guess. I clearly stated mine was such. The OP simply multiplied the quantity of his client hosts' interfaces by their link speed and posted that as his "requirement", which is where the 50Gb/s figure came from. IIRC, he posted that as more of a question than a statement. -- Stan