On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, Jason White <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mine is six years old now (two Xeon 5140 CPUs at 2.33 ghz, 4GB RAM) and
> still more than adequate. The boot time is undoubtedly helped by the SAS
> drives. If I were buying a new machine, though, I'd consider an SSD.
> Incidentally, I bought it used, at a very large discount and the SAS disks
> were a surprise.

If  you aren't using systemd then I doubt that SAS disks gain you anything.  
The advantage of SAS is command queuing and that's not much of an advantage if 
you have mostly a single process accessing the disk.  It's only when systemd 
launches lots of daemons at the same time that command queuing can give an 
advantage.

Also if you were to compare 6yo SAS disks with modern SATA disks at the same 
rotational speed then I expect that SATA would win.  More data per track means 
fewer and shorter seeks.

Also Intel SSD costs about $1 per gig.  It's really not expensive nowadays, 
and Intel is probably the most expensive SSD.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to