Actually ... another tool that is VERY useful to testing/stressing disk
systems is JetStress, from our buddies at MS. We use it all the time to
benchmark new cluster implimentations, and confirm that our configurations
will deliver what the customer's target IOPs are. They dont want to know
exactly how many IOPs the system is capable of, just weather or not the
system can sustain thier usages models.

We went for broke once and cranked up all the manual settings to rediculous
values. We exceeded thier requirements by a mere 1700+ %, and our storage
management guys called us and wanted to know what we were doing because we
were "melting the symmetrix" .... heheheh

- LC

"Jez T" wrote in message
...

"Mikael Antonsen" wrote
But still, 5x Write speed with that module.
I just dont think ppl that bought the 642 without would think.."ohh thats
a okai speed".
I know the acceleration will help in some ways yes, but still.
There really must be something wrong here.

Actually, most ppl who buy a 642 never bother testing disk performance, so
would never notice either way.

For an objective performance, try IOMETER
http://www.iometer.org/
That's the 'standard' for testing disk performance.

I have a customer right now (Danish, ironically) who's complaining of a
similar problem. We have just put a LOT of resource into proving that the
performance is actually about right for the system, and I have to ring him
tomorrow to explain to him why he's a complete ****wit...