From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 17 02:57:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org 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 5EB3416A4DD for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 02:57:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ade@lovett.com) Received: from mail.lovett.com (foo.lovett.com [67.134.38.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073B343D45 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 02:57:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ade@lovett.com) Received: from hellfire.canal.lovett.com ([172.16.32.20]:50472) by mail.lovett.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1G2JIC-000F0z-Vq; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:57:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: <7579f7fb0607161131h19a995ffjeceda64feb4d7a7a@mail.gmail.com> References: <813466C3-8E34-4886-9689-044086F4F64C@dragondata.com> <7376DAAA-4C67-495F-A532-5A86C47E8F75@FreeBSD.org> <7579f7fb0607140806q1cf1baf4q24a6f2ec14118a54@mail.gmail.com> <3B9652BC-027D-4FC5-A2E9-3CD7AF12DC4B@freebsd.org> <7579f7fb0607161131h19a995ffjeceda64feb4d7a7a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <6BF5AB95-9A4D-4ABD-9717-6623F274CFCD@freebsd.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ade Lovett Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:57:08 -0700 To: Matthew Jacob X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Sender: ade@lovett.com Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Current favorite FC HBA? X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 02:57:10 -0000 On Jul 16, 2006, at 11:31 , Matthew Jacob wrote: > I'm trying to get the 2422 support complete. Oh, cool. Drop me a note when you're ready, and I should be able to poke around in my budgets somewhere for some test gear. > Wait a year. SAS/SATA will blow both away for nearline. Maybe, I'm not so sure. Certainly in terms of throughput, SAS/SATA are relatively close to their SCSI/FCAL counterparts, but I have a number of systems where the throughput is pretty small, but the IO operations/second are (very) high. The SATA drives I've tried in that role have failed miserably compared to their SCSI brethren. -aDe