| |||||||||||||
LUNs and LUsLUNs and LUsPosted Feb 25, 2005 17:44 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: Multipath support in the device mapper by James Parent article: Multipath support in the device mapper In most cases, it's just intellectually irritating when people call SCSI logical units LUNs (LUN = logical unit number). But when you're talking about a complex network like this with multiple paths, it's downright confusing. If there are 8 paths to a LU, the LU could have 8 different LUNs. People started counting storage equipment by counting LUNs because it solved the ambiguity of what you consider one unit. Like counting spindles of disk or heads of sheep (even though you aren't actually interested in the spindles or heads themselves). Now, it doesn't solve any ambiguity and using a LUN as a metaphor for the function of a logical unit is just wrong. Speaking of identifying units, I notice that you plug your fibre channel cables into a "solution." I wonder if that's something technical people would know better by an older name, such as "subsystem" or "network."
(Log in to post comments)
``Solution''s eating the heart out of technical discussion Posted Feb 25, 2005 20:15 UTC (Fri) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] Sadly, I saw this in actio earlier today. A colleague, a mostly-techno type, was describing a test setup to me. He really said, ``The client bridge can plug into both wireless and wired solutions''. When I asked whether he was trying to describe wireless and wired networks (it's even a syllable shorter), he allowed as how he was. :-(
`actio' --> `action' Posted Feb 25, 2005 20:19 UTC (Fri) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] It seemed to be so simple a comment that I didn't really proofread it.
LUNs and LUs Posted Feb 26, 2005 18:22 UTC (Sat) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link] I tend to think of "solution" as just a pretentious term for "thingy". Doing that word substitution in my head makes IT marketing literature somewhat more tolerable.
|
|||||||||||||