Configure Xserve RAID as a single RAID 5 array?

We just picked up a used Xserve RAID with 14x750GB drives, and we want to configure the entire unit as a single RAID5 array. RAID Utility will let us configure each side as a separate array, but not both sides in a single array. Is this not possible or are we just missing something simple?

No, each side of the RAID is logically separate so while you can create a RAID 5 on either side there is no way to create a single RAID5 of the unit. You can create a RAID 50 and make the 2 RAID5s into a single volume software RAID 0 by using Disk Utility to join the two 5s into a single volume but that's as close as it comes.
HTH,
=Tod

Similar Messages

KT3 Ultra2-R, RAID - single disc array

There are threads on this forum that discuss how to create a single disc array using onboard RAID to free up IDE1 and 2 for non-HDD devices.
What exactly does the following taken directly from the KT3 Ultra2-R page on MSI.com mean?
"Note: Only two hard disk drives will adopt the RAID function."
Does this mean that only a maximum of two arrays can be created using either 2, 3 or 4 physical hard drives?

My guess is that the wording of that warning is poor. What it is trying to say is that while four physical drives can be attached to IDE RAID those four physical drives can only be configured as 4 single disc arrays, 2 two disc arrays, or 2 single disc arrays and 1 two disc array.
Instead of "Note: Only two hard disk drives will adopt the RAID function." perhaps "Note: Each array can contain a maximum of two physical drives."
Also, risk_reversal, have you noticed whether or not the physical location of the connection to RAID affects the array? I currently have one single disc array on IDE3 master. If I move a new drive to that location and connect the current drive on IDE4 will that affect the array currently created for that physical drive?
I assume that the drive letters will change but other than that, is the RAID BIOS identifying the drives by some id other than just which IDE they are connected to?

Can you combine the two sides of an Xserve RAID into a single drive?

I am looking to combine my Xserve sides into a single drive so that it will be more efficient for storing beyond hi-def video. I have an Xserve RAID with 14x750GB drives which format in RAID5 down to 4.09TB per side. I want to create a singe 8.18TB drive from these.
Is there an easy way to do it?

Thanks for the info William, I did backup a few important files before this happened, but I would like to get to a few more.
It happened when our IT guy was showing me how to create a new RAID set. He created a set while explaining a few things, then selected the new one he made, and deleted it. Right then, both sets disappeared and were deleted, the empty one he made, and the one we needed. I was watching him, and he didn't select both, just the empty one he'd made. So, I was hoping that there would be a work around just so that I could maybe use a data rescue utility to possibly pair the 2 together long enough for me to back up some files.
If anyone has any recommendations, please let me know.
thank you.

Storage 3320 single raid controller connecting with 02 Host Connection

Dear ALL,
I have 3320 with single raid controller, 5x HDD. I started to install it in a single-bus configuration to meet up with Host & External tape due to the following diagram:
1) using a correct SCSI jumper cable to connect between the SCSI port "CH0" and the SNGL BUS CONF together
2) Connecting the SCSI port labeled "CH1" with SCSI LVD Sun Server running Solaris 9 by SCSI cable
3) Connecting the SCSI port labeled "CH3" with the external tape device by the SCSI cable.
As a result, the Host Server can see the only Logical Drives and i could make the approciate partitions.
But the problem is that the Server could not see the SCSI Tape device on this case (Tape device & cable are fine, tested ok before). I am wondering that if all connection above with connecting to Server & Tape device are ok here, then why is the tape device not being recongised under the Solaris ?? and even it's not being known under the OK prompt when i tried to run probe-scsi...
regards
Scott

Please bypass all questions above, i would like to brief what i need to get helps as the below.
Pls advice me how to get the external SCSI LVD tape device connected with SE 3320 raid Controller WHILE the Array 3320 was connected with Sun Server through the SCSI Port labeled "CH 1", the SCSI jumper cable connected between "CH 0" and the SNGL BUS CONF port in a single-bus configuration (By the way, Se 3320 raid is working well with Server).
Thanks for any comments
Scott

Single RAID 5 voume with partitions or mulitple RAID volumes?

I'm setting up in the RAID Utility. My question is: Is it better to create a single RAID 5 Volume and create 3 partitions using Disk Utility or create 3 RAID 5 Volumes from the RAID 5 Set? I want the OS, Data 1, and Data 2 to be separate and get the best performance possible. Any questions, let me know.

Hello, Techromancer27, and welcome to the AppleBoards,
Are you asking about the Xserve RAID the 14 drive hardware unit or setting up a RAID inside an Xserve using the RAID card? This discussion group is dedicated to the Xserve RAID hardware unit so it is easy for these questions to get confusing.
If you are asking about the Xserve itself and the internal disks you have only the option of creating a single RAID5. RAID5 requires a minimum of 3 drives which is all the Xserve can hold so your choice is pretty clear. If you are asking about an external unit of some kind with more drives you'll need to elaborate.
HTH,
=Tod

Achieve RAID 0+1 on 6130 Array

Documentation for the 6130 indicates support for RAID 0,1,3,5 & 0+1. However when creating a new storage profile in the console, the options listed are only 0,1,3 & 5. In order to achieve 0+1 should I create 2 Raid 0 pools and then mirror in VxVM? Am I missing something?
Using:
Java Web Console Version 2.2.4
SUNWstadm 2.4.50.009, SUNWstade 2.4.55.005 on Solaris 9
Array Support Library for VERITAS Volume Manager
VxVM 4.0
Thanks for your help!

Spoke w/ tech support today. Turns out the RAID1 configuration on the 6130 is actually RAID 1+0. RAID 0+1 is not supported natively, and would require a software solution such as VxVM.

HT204053 hi i want to use find my mac but i got this massage (some configurations, such as software or hardware RAID,do not support a recovery partition and can't be used with find my mac)

hi i want to use find my mac but i got this massage (some configurations, such as software or hardware RAID,do not support a recovery partition and can't be used with find my mac)

hi i want to use find my mac but i got this massage (some configurations, such as software or hardware RAID,do not support a recovery partition and can't be used with find my mac)

Can I put all 4 disks in my Mac Pro in a single RAID 1 set?

Can I put all 4 disks in my Mac Pro in a single RAID 1 set? I have tried DU but it will not let me add the disk that holds the OS. Machine is brand new. I am looking for one big disk.
Any help would be appreciated!!
I am on OSX 10.5.4

Yes, but since it will wipe out everything on all four drives, you have to use Disk Utility on the install DVD. Be sure to have another drive for backup with another copy of OSX. You can't do firmware updates from OSX on a RAID set.

Xserve won't boot from RAID after a Shutdown

Hello
I'm running a new Intel Xserve 2x2.0Ghz with Apple Raid Card an 3x250GB Apple Drives in.
Starting from 10.5 Setup DVD and setting up a Raid 5 using the Apple Raid Utilitie works fine an also the installation works great. Raid set is ok, Volume initilized, all up an green.
If I then power down the Xserve (to move in to a rack or so..) an power it up again, the raid setup is gone, no bootdevice. No raid sets nor volumes are available when checking again with the Apple Raid Utilitie from the setup dvd. Backup batterie is charged an I also replaced the raid card one time.
Has anyone an idea whats wrong with this box?
Best regards,
Christian, Switzerland

MrHoffman wrote:
The EFI firmware, the SMC and possibly the disk I/O path seem good potential candidates for culprit.
Load and run the hardware diagnostics.
Reset the SMC, and reset the LOM.
I'm running the EFI diagnostic tool now. Firmware and disk I/O path came to mind, let's just hope it's not a major hardware issue
beatle20359 wrote:
Hi Jeff,
Do you have the specs of the xserve and the version of OSX server you are trying to install? Does the Xserve have the RAID card installed in it and what size are the drive modules.
All the best
Beatle
2x 3GHz Dual-Core Xeon
8GB RAM
OS X Server v 10.6.3 (the version I'm trying to install, that is)
No RAID card. The system drive is 80GB and a second storage drive is 1TB.

To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question

People often ask: Should I raid my disks?
The question is simple, unfortunately the answer is not. So here I'm going to give you another guide to help you decide when a raid array is advantageous and how to go about it. Notice that this guide also applies to SSD's, with the expection of the parts about mechanical failure.
What is a RAID?
RAID is the acronym for "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks". The concept originated at the University of Berkely in 1987 and was intended to create large storage capacity with smaller disks without the need for very expensive and reliable disks, that were very expensive at that time, often a tenfold of smaller disks. Today prices of hard disks have fallen so much that it often is more attractive to buy a single 1 TB disk than two 500 GB disks. That is the reason that today RAID is often described as "Redundant Array of Independent Disks".
The idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. Note that 'Spanning' is not in any way comparable to RAID, it is just a way, like inverse partitioning, to extend the base partition to use multiple disks, without changing the method of reading and writing to that extended partition.
Why use a RAID?
Now with these lower disks prices today, why would a video editor consider a raid array? There are two reasons:
1. Redundancy (or security)
2. Performance
Notice that it can be a combination of both reasons, it is not an 'either/or' reason.
Does a video editor need RAID?
No, if the above two reasons, redundancy and performance are not relevant. Yes if either or both reasons are relevant.
Re 1. Redundancy
Every mechanical disk will eventually fail, sometimes on the first day of use, sometimes only after several years of usage. When that happens, all data on that disk are lost and the only solution is to get a new disk and recreate the data from a backup (if you have one) or through tedious and time-consuming work. If that does not bother you and you can spare the time to recreate the data that were lost, then redundancy is not an issue for you. Keep in mind that disk failures often occur at inconvenient moments, on a weekend when the shops are closed and you can't get a replacement disk, or when you have a tight deadline.
Re 2. Performance
Opponents of RAID will often say that any modern disk is fast enough for video editing and they are right, but only to a certain extent. As fill rates of disks go up, performance goes down, sometimes by 50%. As the number of disk activities on the disk go up , like accessing (reading or writing) pagefile, media cache, previews, media, project file, output file, performance goes down the drain. The more tracks you have in your project, the more strain is put on your disk. 10 tracks require 10 times the bandwidth of a single track. The more applications you have open, the more your pagefile is used. This is especially apparent on systems with limited memory.
The following chart shows how fill rates on a single disk will impact performance:
Remember that I said previously the idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. That means a RAID will not fill up as fast as a single disk and not experience the same performance degradation.
RAID basics
Now that we have established the reasons why people may consider RAID, let's have a look at some of the basics.
Single or Multiple?
There are three methods to configure a RAID array: mirroring, striping and parity check. These are called levels and levels are subdivided in single or multiple levels, depending on the method used. A single level RAID0 is striping only and a multiple level RAID15 is a combination of mirroring (1) and parity check (5). Multiple levels are designated by combining two single levels, like a multiple RAID10, which is a combination of single level RAID0 with a single level RAID1.
Hardware or Software?
The difference is quite simple: hardware RAID controllers have their own processor and usually their own cache. Software RAID controllers use the CPU and the RAM on the motherboard. Hardware controllers are faster but also more expensive. For RAID levels without parity check like Raid0, Raid1 and Raid10 software controllers are quite good with a fast PC.
The common Promise and Highpoint cards are all software controllers that (mis)use the CPU and RAM memory. Real hardware RAID controllers all use their own IOP (I/O Processor) and cache (ever wondered why these hardware controllers are expensive?).
There are two kinds of software RAID's. One is controlled by the BIOS/drivers (like Promise/Highpoint) and the other is solely OS dependent. The first kind can be booted from, the second one can only be accessed after the OS has started. In performance terms they do not differ significantly.
For the technically inclined: Cluster size, Block size and Chunk size
In short: Cluster size applies to the partition and Block or Stripe size applies to the array.
With a cluster size of 4 KB, data are distributed across the partition in 4 KB parts. Suppose you have a 10 KB file, three full clusters will be occupied: 4 KB - 4 KB - 2 KB. The remaining 2 KB is called slackspace and can not be used by other files. With a block size (stripe) of 64 KB, data are distributed across the array disks in 64 KB parts. Suppose you have a 200 KB file, the first part of 64 KB is located on disk A, the second 64 KB is located on disk B, the third 64 KB is located on disk C and the remaining 8 KB on disk D. Here there is no slackspace, because the block size is subdivided into clusters. When working with audio/video material a large block size is faster than smaller block size. Working with smaller files a smaller block size is preferred.
Sometimes you have an option to set 'Chunk size', depending on the controller. It is the minimal size of a data request from the controller to a disk in the array and only useful when striping is used. Suppose you have a block size of 16 KB and you want to read a 1 MB file. The controller needs to read 64 times a block of 16 KB. With a chunk size of 32 KB the first two blocks will be read from the first disk, the next two blocks from the next disk, and so on. If the chunk size is 128 KB. the first 8 blocks will be read from the first disk, the next 8 block from the second disk, etcetera. Smaller chunks are advisable with smaller filer, larger chunks are better for larger (audio/video) files.
RAID Levels
For a full explanation of various RAID levels, look here: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_00/html
What are the benefits of each RAID level for video editing and what are the risks and benefits of each level to help you achieve better redundancy and/or better performance? I will try to summarize them below.
RAID0
The Band AID of RAID. There is no redundancy! There is a risk of losing all data that is a multiplier of the number of disks in the array. A 2 disk array carries twice the risk over a single disk, a X disk array carries X times the risk of losing it all.
A RAID0 is perfectly OK for data that you will not worry about if you lose them. Like pagefile, media cache, previews or rendered files. It may be a hassle if you have media files on it, because it requires recapturing, but not the end-of-the-world. It will be disastrous for project files.
Performance wise a RAID0 is almost X times as fast as a single disk, X being the number of disks in the array.
RAID1
The RAID level for the paranoid. It gives no performance gain whatsoever. It gives you redundancy, at the cost of a disk. If you are meticulous about backups and make them all the time, RAID1 may be a better solution, because you can never forget to make a backup, you can restore instantly. Remember backups require a disk as well. This RAID1 level can only be advised for the C drive IMO if you do not have any trust in the reliability of modern-day disks. It is of no use for video editing.
RAID3
The RAID level for video editors. There is redundancy! There is only a small performance hit when rebuilding an array after a disk failure due to the dedicated parity disk. There is quite a perfomance gain achieveable, but the drawback is that it requires a hardware controller from Areca. You could do worse, but apart from it being the Rolls-Royce amongst the hardware controllers, it is expensive like the car.
Performance wise it will achieve around 85% (X-1) on reads and 60% (X-1) on writes over a single disk with X being the number of disks in the array. So with a 6 disk array in RAID3, you get around 0.85x (6-1) = 425% the performance of a single disk on reads and 300% on writes.
RAID5 & RAID6
The RAID level for non-video applications with distributed parity. This makes for a somewhat severe hit in performance in case of a disk failure. The double parity in RAID6 makes it ideal for NAS applications.
The performance gain is slightly lower than with a RAID3. RAID6 requires a dedicated hardware controller, RAID5 can be run on a software controller but the CPU overhead negates to a large extent the performance gain.
RAID10
The RAID level for paranoids in a hurry. It delivers the same redundancy as RAID 1, but since it is a multilevel RAID, combined with a RAID0, delivers twice the performance of a single disk at four times the cost, apart from the controller. The main advantage is that you can have two disk failures at the same time without losing data, but what are the chances of that happening?
RAID30, 50 & 60
Just striped arrays of RAID 3, 5 or 6 which doubles the speed while keeping redundancy at the same level.
EXTRAS
RAID level 0 is striping, RAID level 1 is mirroring and RAID levels 3, 5 & 6 are parity check methods. For parity check methods, dedicated controllers offer the possibility of defining a hot-spare disk. A hot-spare disk is an extra disk that does not belong to the array, but is instantly available to take over from a failed disk in the array. Suppose you have a 6 disk RAID3 array with a single hot-spare disk and assume one disk fails. What happens? The data on the failed disk can be reconstructed in the background, while you keep working with negligeable impact on performance, to the hot-spare. In mere minutes your system is back at the performance level you were before the disk failure. Sometime later you take out the failed drive, replace it for a new drive and define that as the new hot-spare.
As stated earlier, dedicated hardware controllers use their own IOP and their own cache instead of using the memory on the mobo. The larger the cache on the controller, the better the performance, but the main benefits of cache memory are when handling random R+W activities. For sequential activities, like with video editing it does not pay to use more than 2 GB of cache maximum.
REDUNDANCY(or security)
Not using RAID entails the risk of a drive failing and losing all data. The same applies to using RAID0 (or better said AID0), only multiplied by the number of disks in the array.
RAID1 or 10 overcomes that risk by offering a mirror, an instant backup in case of failure at high cost.
RAID3, 5 or 6 offers protection for disk failure by reconstructing the lost data in the background (1 disk for RAID3 & 5, 2 disks for RAID6) while continuing your work. This is even enhanced by the use of hot-spares (a double assurance).
PERFORMANCE
RAID0 offers the best performance increase over a single disk, followed by RAID3, then RAID5 amd finally RAID6. RAID1 does not offer any performance increase.
Hardware RAID controllers offer the best performance and the best options (like adjustable block/stripe size and hot-spares), but they are costly.
SUMMARY
If you only have 3 or 4 disks in total, forget about RAID. Set them up as individual disks, or the better alternative, get more disks for better redundancy and better performance. What does it cost today to buy an extra disk when compared to the downtime you have when a single disk fails?
If you have room for at least 4 or more disks, apart from the OS disk, consider a RAID3 if you have an Areca controller, otherwise consider a RAID5.
If you have even more disks, consider a multilevel array by striping a parity check array to form a RAID30, 50 or 60.
If you can afford the investment get an Areca controller with battery backup module (BBM) and 2 GB of cache. Avoid as much as possible the use of software raids, especially under Windows if you can.
RAID, if properly configured will give you added redundancy (or security) to protect you from disk failure while you can continue working and will give you increased performance.
Look carefully at this chart to see what a properly configured RAID can do to performance and compare it to the earlier single disk chart to see the performance difference, while taking into consideration that you can have one disks (in each array) fail at the same time without data loss:
Hope this helps in deciding whether RAID is worthwhile for you.
WARNING: If you have a power outage without a UPS, all bets are off.
A power outage can destroy the contents of all your disks if you don't have a proper UPS. A BBM may not be sufficient to help in that case.

Harm,
thanks for your comment.
Your understanding was absolutely right.
Sorry my mistake its QNAP 639 PRO, populated with 5 1TB, one is empty.
So for my understanding, in my configuration you suggest NOT to use RAID-0. Im not willing to have more drives in my workstation becouse if my projekts are finished, i archiv on QNAP or archiv on other external drive.
My only intention is to have as much speed and as much performance as possible during developing a projekt
BTW QNAP i also use as media-center in combination with Sony PS3 to run the encoded files.
For my final understanding:
C: i understand
D: i understand
E and F: does it mean, when i create a projekt on E, all my captured and project-used MPEG - files should be situated in F? Or which media in F you mean?
Following your suggestions in want to rebulid Harms-Best Vista64-Benchmark comp to reach maximum speed and performance. Can i use in general the those hardware components (exept so many HD drives and exept Areca raid controller ) in my drive configuration C to F. Or would you suggest some changings in my situation?

2 Filled Sonnet Fusion 500P enclosures; RAID 0/1, or RAID 5?

I currently have a Sonnet Fusion 500P loaded with 5 WD 500GB RE2 drives; all running individually and not RAIDed; this box is connected to a Sonnet Tempo E2P in my MacPro.
I'm interested in getting a 2nd identical enclosure and drives, and creating a RAID system using 10 drives. I also plan on upgrading the E2P to the E4P, since it will provide increased RAID performance that the E2P does not.
I've been reading the various posts on RAID on these forums, and also have looked through the AMUG articles and reviews, and I have a couple of questions.
First, can I stripe the 5 drives in each enclosure, and then mirror the two enclosures? This RAID setup will be used for Final Cut Pro capture and editing, and also for DVD Studio Pro files. Basically, I would have 2.5TB of high speed storage, and a duplicate of that.
Second question-can I do this with Disk Utility, or would I need additional software/hardware to accomplish it?
And finally, I'm a little vague about RAID 5 setups, but would it be better to create a RAID 5 with one enclosure and 5 drives, using 4 for storage and one for parity information? From my limited knowledge of this, I think that if the RAID 5 failed, it could be rebuilt using the info on the 5th drive? Is this correct?
What would be the best way to go here, taking into account the hardware I already have? If I'm off base, I'm open to suggestions for a different setup that would have comparable storage space, speed, and backup.
Thanks for any advice anyone can give.

Dear Mike,
It sounds like you want more RAID capabilities than Disk Utility can easily provide. Since you are looking for a new host adapter card anyway, you might as well get one that can provide RAID 0, 1, 5 and 1/0. I would suggest the HighPoint RocketRAID 2314 if you want to stay with individual eSATA cables. The AMUG review can be found here:
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/highpoint/2314/
If you would rather have a card with a single cable and do not mind purchasing an extra cable, I really like the HighPoint RocketRAID 2314MS which is the same card with a different cable system. Here is that AMUG review and a link to the cable you would need:
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/highpoint/2314ms/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000JQ51CM/arizomacinusergr
The Sonnet E4P is a good card but it cannot support RAID 5, 10 or 50 and the HighPoint cards can.
The HighPoint cards also provide just as good or better performance with a 10 drive SATA PM configuration like the one you are considering.
It sounds like the main reason for the second SATA PM enclosure is mainly backup. Please understand that a RAID 5, 10 or 50 configuration adds redundancy to your hard disk array but it is not a guarantee that you will recover from directory corruption or user errors. If the directory is corrupted on a RAID 10 it can easily write the same corrupted data on the mirror copy of the drive.
If you truly want a backup, I would consider using SuperDuper or Carbon Copy Cloner at the end of each day to backup the work on the first SATA PM RAID to the RAID in the 2nd SATA PM enclosure. Having your backup off-line when not in use is the best way to be ensure the backup data will be intact when you need it.
Have fun!

Conversion of ad20 non raid to a D20 raid 1 and keeping existing OS/data

I have a new D20 with windows 7-x64 pre installed on it. I purchased a second Lenovo supplied sata add in drive to convert the system to raid 1.
When I add the “raid 1” in support in the bios, the system when it reboots does not recognize the existing windows 7 partition.
When I used “other mfg” on board raid configuration, the working partition was considered the master partition and was automatically mirrored to the new added drive (making it raid1)
My expectation was that there would be either a “thinkvantage” tool that allowed you to do this from the OS, or there would be a some OS add on tool that performs this function
So my question.. Can you convert a d20 non raid to a D20 raid 1 (given drives are the same etc), and if so (I am a glass half full person), what is the process required to do so.
thanks
matt k.

if the marvell RAID controller hasn't been enabled, you'll need to install the driver. it can be found here: http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?lndocid=MIGR-73697
after this is installed, boot into the D20 BIOS and enable RAID. reboot again into the unconfigured drive and see if you can get into windows. if so, you can set up your RAID 1 array.
if you want to control RAID configuration from within windows, you'll need to install the marvell RAID utility found here: http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?lndocid=MIGR-73073
(edit: typo)
ThinkStation C20
ThinkPad X1C · X220 · X60T · s30 · 600

OS drive + RAID 1 with Apple RAID card

I have a G5 Xserve with the RAID card and three ADM drives. How do I set up Megaraid to have a single non-raid drive and a RAID 1 mirror? I installed the OS onto one of the drives after a "destroyconfig". When I create the RAID with drives 1 and 2, the drive 0 is lost. THe only way I found to make it work was with a soft RAID 1 in disk utility.

How do I set up Megaraid to have a single non-raid drive and a RAID 1 mirror?
I'd go with not connecting one of the drives to the RAID card.
When you installed the card you replaced three short SATA cables with three long ones - one per drive.
Just replace one of the long ones with one of the original short ones. This will reconnect one of the drives back to the motherboard, leaving two drives connected to the RAID card.
Kind of a hack, for sure, but in lieu of having a JBOD mode in megaraid it seems like the simplest solution.

How many luns does mac OSX support from a single target (array) is it 255??

How many luns does mac OSX support from a single target (array) is it 255?
For example, if using the Dual-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI Express card? Is it 255, 512 or higher? I know it uses the ATTO driver, but I can't find any documentaiton about the upper limits of how many luns this HBA can address from a single target array on a SAN. Thanks.

Hi,
The card should be an ATTO 42ES whcih supports 255 LUNS per channel
Here's the info from the attached link
Consider the following Celerity FC host adapter guidelines:
• ATTO 4-Gb and 8-Gb FC cards (PCI-X and PCIe only) are supported. • Latest HP-specific ATTO Celerity FC host adapter driver • Latest HP-specific ATTO Configuration Tool • A maximum of 256 targets per host adapter channel are supported. • A maximum of 255 logical unit numbers (LUNs) per host adapter channel are supported. • PowerPC- and Intel-based servers are supported.
http://www.attotech.com/pdfs/MacOSFCconnEVA5697-7653.pdf
Hope that helps
Beatle

Configuring JCo3 Connection Pool with single sign on on non SAP Java server

Hi Everyone,
i have configured a connection pool on JBoss as per JCo3 Documentation and is working great.
Now I need help to configure this connection pool with single sign on so that RFc on SAP ECC systems are executed using end users credential rather than using single user name password used to configure JCo connection pool.
On SAP Java stack I am sure its possible within Java WebDynpro and i assume using JCA resource adapter. But what if we don't want to use SAP Java App server.
Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Divyakumar Jain

Eason, 你好！
I have exactly the same problem. Did you find a solution to this problem? If so, please let me know!

Configure Xserve RAID as a single RAID 5 array?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for