From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 30 13:30:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F9016A4CE; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:30:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.distrust.net (mail.distrust.net [69.93.230.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE4343D2D; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:30:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dsze@alumni.uwaterloo.ca) Received: from eeyore.distrust.net (CPE000021e92a64-CM014320019900.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [24.112.29.214]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.distrust.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5UDU3aI037840 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:30:04 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dsze@alumni.uwaterloo.ca) Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20040630092141.02c54ec0@mail.distrust.net> X-Sender: dsze@engmail.uwaterloo.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:30:04 -0400 To: "Marc G. Fournier" From: David Sze In-Reply-To: <20040629150632.J74139@ganymede.hub.org> References: <20040629150632.J74139@ganymede.hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.73, clamav-milter version 0.73a on mail.distrust.net X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hitachi vs Seagate: Opinions wanted X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:30:38 -0000 At 03:11 PM 29/06/2004 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote this to All: >I've always used Seagate or Quantum drives in my servers ... with the >recent thought about switching to Dual-Athlon servers, from Intel, and the >caveats about both heat and power that I've had, its been recommended >switching to Hitachi drives from the usual Seagate ... also, apparently >the failure rates are higher on the Seagate's are much higher then the >Hitachi ... > >Since I can't say I've ever had a complaint (other then the U320 firmware >fiasco that Seagate did fix), I'm wondering if there is that much of a >difference with the Hitachi's to warrant the extra ~$50/drive ... ? > >The server we are putting together will be a 2U chassis, with 6 U320 >drives in it ... either hitachi or seagate ... If you will be using a motherboard with an LSI Logic chipset (mpt driver under FreeBSD), definitely do _not_ get Hitachi/IBM drives. There's a weird interaction that causes the OS not to boot if there is more than one Hitachi drive attached to an mpt controller. A single drive works fine.