Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:31:51 +0100 (CET)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Karim Fodil-Lemelin <fodillemlinkarim@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, gibbs@freebsd.org, scottl@freebsd.org, mjacob@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1301191930130.6044@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <50FABB71.6050406@freebsd.org>
References:  <CAA3ZYrBV9f%2BcHx4jvS0UKTr%2Bp7eNUBA0S2%2Bv9oZAHqwm9VBOWw@mail.gmail.com> <6C0B86E6-195C-4D35-AE40-3D2F9F6D28FB@yahoo.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1301182217590.1478@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <1358544287.32417.251.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <50F9CFEB.5060302@feral.com> <50F9DB9A.9050303@gmail.com> <50FABB71.6050406@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> I remember those drives from some 20 years ago. Before that time, SCSI
> and IDE drives were independently developed and SCSI drives offered way

yes. 20 years ago it was true. even in 1995, when i had SCSI controller in 
my 486 and it was great compared to ATA.

today SATA and SAS are mostly the same, just protocol are different.
the main difference is that SATA is simpler and have less problems.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1301191930130.6044>