On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 08:30 -0600, Cory Robin wrote: > Brent Baisley wrote: > > > If you do go the new hardware route, I wouldn't go with SCSI is you > > only have $2K to spend. S-ATA2 based drives would give you similar > > performance to SCSI, but at a big cost savings. SCSI's big > > performance advantage was in command queueing which SATA2 drives now > > have. > > <snip> > I agree with the S-ATA2 recommendation.
The SCSI choice is not purely about performance. In my experience SCSI drives are much more reliable than IDE or SATA. You'll save money to start with but may spend it later in replacement drives and downtime. Its a tricky choice with only 2k to spend... mark -- This email (and any attachments) is intended solely for the individual(s) to whom addressed. It may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any statement or opinions therein are not necessarily those of ITN unless specifically stated. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or copying is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Security and reliability of the e-mail and attachments are not guaranteed. You must take full responsibility for virus checking. Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read e-mails sent to and from our server(s). Independent Television News Limited, Registered No. 548648 England, VAT Reg. No: GB 756 2995 81, 200 Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8XZ, Telephone: 020 7833 3000. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
