Article View: comp.sys.dec
Article #3960Re: What's wrong with a BA213 and a KFMSA?
From: Alan Rollow - Alan's Home for Wa...
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:23
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:23
50 lines
3284 bytes
3284 bytes
In article <0096545A.661A7C40@vax.nott.ac.uk>, cczanj@vax.nott.ac.uk (Andy Jack) writes: > >We have a VAX 6410 that needs more disk. The existing KDB50 controller is full >with 4 RA drives and there is a feeling that the whole system may be replaced >next year by a 4000 series machine. It seemed a good idea to buy a KFMSA >controller and start buying RF disks which would carry over to a 4000. An RF73 >won't go in the existing SA600 cabinet, so DEC offer us an R400X cabinet at a >fairly high price (approx 50% of the cost of the RF73). A third party has >offered an RF73 in a BA213 cabinet at a much lower cost but DEC say that the >combination of a KFMSA and a BA-style cabinet for DSSI disks is not supported. > >Why ever not? What has the box got to do with it? Lots of things actually. When a particular configuration is SUPPORTED it means that it has been qualified to work correctly in reasonably extreme conditions. This means that DEC doesn't believe that it will break in normal operation nor violate typical laws, about running radio stations and small space heaters... The subsystem has to be tested to make sure that the box keeps in the things in the box adequately cool and within their operating range given reasonable outside conditions. The subsystem has to be tested to make sure the power supply can provide sufficient power in the common extreme conditions (and that more extreme conditions aren't like to be faced). The subsystem has to be tested to make sure that it doesn't "sound" like a small radio station to nearby radios (FCC testing). These are probably the most common things tested to make sure a subsystem is supported. It's expensive to do. Therefore we limit the configurations tested and supported. In the specific example, it is most likely the case that the combination of a BA213 was never tested with an RF73. Or if it was tested, problems not worth the expense of solving were found. If the 3rd party vendor is willing to guarantee that the disk won't overheat in the box, that the power supply won't catch fire if you spin up lots of disks at the same time and that your equivalent of the FCC won't come banging on your door, go for it. > > Andy >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Cripps Computing Centre, JANET: cczanj@uk.ac.nott.vax >University of Nottingham, BITNET: cczanj%uk.ac.nott.vax@ukacrl.bitnet >Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK Internet: cczanj%vax.nott.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk >(Phone: +44 602 513328) > -- Alan Rollow alan@nabeth.cxo.dec.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec19.002353.23896@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!dbased.nuo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nabeth!alanReferences:
<0096545A.661A7C40@vax.nott.ac.uk>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!dbased.nuo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nabeth!alan From: alan@nabeth.enet.dec.com (Alan Rollow - Alan's Home for Wayward Tumbleweeds.) Subject: Re: What's wrong with a BA213 and a KFMSA? Message-ID: <1992Dec19.002353.23896@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> Lines: 51 Sender: alan@nabeth (Alan Rollow - Alan's Home for Wayward Tumbleweeds.) Reply-To: alan@nabeth.enet.dec.com (Alan Rollow - Alan's Home for Wayward Tumbleweeds.) Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation References: <0096545A.661A7C40@vax.nott.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:23:53 GMT