Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 17:34:45 -0800 (PST) From: Todd Backman <todd@flyingcroc.net> To: Colin Campbell <sgcccdc@citec.qld.gov.au> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SCSI v IDE Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911031728260.68262-100000@wank.necropolis.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.991104105545.21503A-100000@guru.citec.qld.gov.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Colin, Three things: 1. SCSI 2. SCSI 3. SCSI The *only* reason we might use IDE drives is for cheap archival purposes. I run a web farm of +230 FreeBSD boxen and SCSI is the way to go...(to be exact; we use all adaptec cards w/ seagate cheetahs) - Todd On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Colin Campbell wrote: > Hi, > > I am looking at putting together a web server/cache system. At the moment > I am torn between say $2500 for an IDE-based system or $3500 for a SCSI > system. The system is PIII, with memory (of course :-) and 2x9GB disk for > web only or 2x18GB if I add cache. > > I have read in many places that SCSI is "better" (due to the ability of > the controller to issue multiple commands to the disks). But if I have two > IDEs, each on its own controller is there any real performance benefit > with SCSI, assuming the disks are similar in performance characteristics? > > Colin > -- > Colin Campbell > Unix Support/Postmaster/Hostmaster > CITEC > +61 7 3227 7112 > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911031728260.68262-100000>