Bill Moran wrote: > > Has anyone every verified whether or not SATA has the problems that plagued > ATA? Such as crappy quality and lying caches? > > Personally, I still demand SCSI on production servers because it still > seems as if: > a) The performance is still better > b) The reliability is still better > > But I haven't taken a comprehensive look at the SATA offerings. It also > seems as if SATA is more limiting. Most SCSI cards can support 16 > devices, does SATA have similar offerings? I know it's not common, but > if you need that many spindles, you need them! I've used 15-drive SATA Promise arrays with some success. They come in both Fibre Channel and SCSI varieties, and are about $10k with 400GB SATA drives. I've run them up to ~170MB/s with RAID-5, which is more than enough for me. You get the best of both the SATA and SCSI/FC worlds.
-- -- Skylar Thompson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~skylar/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
