Appeal No. 1997-2242 Page 18
Application No. 08/084,370
other secondary considerations,, such as the
tradeoff between cost, reliability, and performance.
Nowhere, does Jones exclude the use of his remapping
system in an environment that does not have spares.
From our review of Jones and Ewert, we find no suggestion for
the examiners assertions, other than from appellant’s own
disclosure. From the teachings of Jones and Ewert of
remapping data, we find no suggestion of regenerating, for
each strip containing a data
chunk located on the failed disk, the data of the data chunk
located on the failed disk, and writing the regenerated data
onto the parity chunk to form a fully folded array as required
by claim 1. Nor do we find any suggestion in Jones and Ewert
for reorganizing the data chunks of the failed disk to form an
array with the characteristics of a RAID level-0 array as
required by
claim 2. In addition, as Jones and Ewert do not disclose or
suggest a storage system including active disks and one failed
disk where the active disks are arranged into a fully folded
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007