| Author |
SAN Terminology Question
|
|
| Clayton Sutton 2006-01-23, 8:46 pm |
| We have a SAN using a Dell/EMC CX500 and CX300. I took the Dell training a
while back but now I am going over the books. I ran across this statement:
"Fibre Channel data transfers are fast, delivering up to 2 Gb/sec with a
single loop; rates of up to 400 MB/sec are possible with dual-loop
configurations."
I remember the instructor saying that too. I don't understand how with two
HBAs it is not 4 Gb/sec instead of 400 MB/sec. Isn't 4 Gb/sec faster then
400 MB/sec? Just need a little clarity.
Thanks for any and all help.
Clayton
| |
| robertwessel2@yahoo.com 2006-01-24, 2:46 am |
|
Clayton Sutton wrote:
> We have a SAN using a Dell/EMC CX500 and CX300. I took the Dell training a
> while back but now I am going over the books. I ran across this statement:
>
> "Fibre Channel data transfers are fast, delivering up to 2 Gb/sec with a
> single loop; rates of up to 400 MB/sec are possible with dual-loop
> configurations."
>
> I remember the instructor saying that too. I don't understand how with two
> HBAs it is not 4 Gb/sec instead of 400 MB/sec. Isn't 4 Gb/sec faster then
> 400 MB/sec? Just need a little clarity.
2Gb/s FC is about 200MB/s. Bits vs. bytes, watch the capitals. In any
event, FC uses 8b/10b encoding, so you get one byte out of each 10 raw
"bits."
| |
| Clayton Sutton 2006-01-29, 8:51 pm |
| Thnaks guys,
I think I got it now.
Clayton
"Clayton Sutton" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:bUfBf.92983$N_.16429@fe07.news.easynews.com...
> We have a SAN using a Dell/EMC CX500 and CX300. I took the Dell training
> a while back but now I am going over the books. I ran across this
> statement:
>
> "Fibre Channel data transfers are fast, delivering up to 2 Gb/sec with a
> single loop; rates of up to 400 MB/sec are possible with dual-loop
> configurations."
>
> I remember the instructor saying that too. I don't understand how with
> two HBAs it is not 4 Gb/sec instead of 400 MB/sec. Isn't 4 Gb/sec faster
> then 400 MB/sec? Just need a little clarity.
>
> Thanks for any and all help.
>
>
> Clayton
>
>
| |
| Clayton Sutton 2006-02-05, 3:19 pm |
| Thx
Clayton
"Clayton Sutton" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:e%OCf.195483$Xg2.17696@fe01.news.easynews.com...
> Thnaks guys,
>
> I think I got it now.
>
>
> Clayton
>
>
>
> "Clayton Sutton" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:bUfBf.92983$N_.16429@fe07.news.easynews.com...
>
>
|
|
|
|