Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:53:43 +0100 From: "Willem Jan Withagen" <wjw@withagen.nl> To: "Erich Dollansky" <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System advice requested Message-ID: <0b9001c3f228$083f84e0$471b3dd4@dual> References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0402131154550.6848-100000@wn4.sci.kun.nl> <0b8201c3f222$a7d3eec0$471b3dd4@dual> <402CB5B1.4070505@pacific.net.sg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: "Erich Dollansky" <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> > > I knew about the SATA stuff from current@, but I would expect that > > carefull choices can prevent some of the major pittfalls. > > I'll have a go at the archive. > > > If you are already at burning money, take SCSI. Those boards are > available with two SCSI U320 channels. It also gives you a real > speed gain. I have a dual Athlon box. It has had for a while an > additional IDE drive. It is real slow compared to SCSI and give a > pretty high CPU load compared to SCSI. Though I have cash to spare, building a 1T array with SCSI would make it rather big and expensive. Since SCSI only goes to 144G. So I'd end up with 8 disks at least. Then I'd put in on a RAID controller and fiber. But that is way too professional. I'd do that for data-centres etc... SCSI disk have a better MBTF, but MBTF/$$ is something different. No, I'm more looking at 5*ATA 250 Gb at RAID-5, with a few spare disks on the shelf get a good ventilated case. it would be just manageble. --WjW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0b9001c3f228$083f84e0$471b3dd4>