Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:41:07 -0600 From: "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" <chad@shire.net> To: Derek Ragona <derek@computinginnovations.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> Subject: Re: SCSI vs. SATA (was Re: Upgrading our mail server) Message-ID: <7AD69749-DD5E-43FD-B371-F3C9A153137E@shire.net> In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20060914112701.021d2058@mail.computinginnovations.com> References: <45096C88.4030203@esiee.fr> <20060914111843.91BC.GERARD@seibercom.net> <4509768C.5030602@esiee.fr> <20060914114608.e130c6a0.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20060914112701.021d2058@mail.computinginnovations.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 14, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Derek Ragona wrote: > SATA is still quite limited. To go beyond those limits use SAS, > but SAS costs even more than SCSI and is brand new technology. Get a 12 or 16 or 24 port Areca card and have a few hot spares and you will see SATA fly for less money than SCSI with higher storage and as high or higher reliability (RAID 6 plus hot spares)... I used to be SCSI only but these new cards and drives offer a lot more for the money and you can make up for reliability by sheer mass and raid 6 and hot spares :-) Chad > > -Derek > > > At 10:46 AM 9/14/2006, Bill Moran wrote: >> In response to Frank Bonnet <f.bonnet@esiee.fr>: >> >> > Gerard Seibert wrote: >> > > Frank Bonnet wrote: >> > > >> > > [...] >> > >> I need SCSI Disks of course , budget is around 10K$ >> > > >> > > Why the insistence on SCSI? Is there any reason that SATA or >> RAID with >> > > SATA is not acceptable? Just curious. >> > >> > Because I want it >> >> Has anyone every verified whether or not SATA has the problems >> that plagued >> ATA? Such as crappy quality and lying caches? >> >> Personally, I still demand SCSI on production servers because it >> still >> seems as if: >> a) The performance is still better >> b) The reliability is still better >> >> But I haven't taken a comprehensive look at the SATA offerings. >> It also >> seems as if SATA is more limiting. Most SCSI cards can support 16 >> devices, does SATA have similar offerings? I know it's not >> common, but >> if you need that many spindles, you need them! >> >> -- >> Bill Moran >> Collaborative Fusion Inc. >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- >> unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- > unsubscribe@freebsd.org" --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad at shire.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7AD69749-DD5E-43FD-B371-F3C9A153137E>