From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Jan 6 6: 6:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from finch-post-11.mail.demon.net (finch-post-11.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F209A37B402 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 06:06:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from caomhin.demon.co.uk ([212.228.234.119]) by finch-post-11.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 16NDw9-000Mpb-0B; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 14:06:11 +0000 Message-ID: <4JD6R5A1lFO8EwPI@caomhin.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 14:04:37 +0000 To: Scott Mitchell Cc: Cliff Sarginson , FreeBSD Questions From: Kevin Golding Subject: Re: Parts I recommend (formerly "Workstation and server-market") References: <20020105195536.27073ca2.johann@broadpark.no> <20020105170230.636999bb.matthew@starbreaker.net> <20020106071439.GE1003@raggedclown.net> <0a5b01c19683$d1087880$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20020106121009.A338@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20020106121009.A338@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.01 U Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20020106121009.A338@localhost>, Scott Mitchell writes >I'd not be so sure that they're mechanically identical -- IME the failure >rate for ATA drives is much higher than the SCSI ones, despite the fact >that the SCSI server drives do a lot more work than the ATA units in the >workstations. Of course most SCSI drives are going to be running at 10Krpm >or above, while your typical ATA drive does 5400 or 7200rpm, so there's >some extra noise for you right away... I suspect there might be some >mechanical differences between a drive that has to run reliably for years >at 15Krpm and one that's idle half the time at 5400rpm in someone's >desktop. Isn't it exactly that reason? A constant velocity should result in less wear than if it ran in a stop/start manner. If you make an ATA drive spin all day long it should have a lot less mechanical wear and such, SCSI would probably still have an edge since they're more likely to be optimised for such things but the gap would be narrower. Also don't forget that servers tend to be looked after much more in general, a lot of desktops take a fair bit of abuse, even if it's just a bit more dust floating around inside the case it's one more thing a desktop needs to deal with. Kevin -- kevin@caomhin.demon.co.uk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message