On 7/12/06, mos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 12:42 PM 7/12/2006, you wrote:
>On Tuesday 11 July 2006 19:26, mos wrote:
> > SCSI drives are also designed to run 24/7 whereas IDE drives are more
> > likely to fail if used on a busy server.
>
>This used to be the case. But there are SATA drives out there now being made
>for "enterprise class," 100% duty cycle operations. See, for example,
>http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=238&Language=en
>
>No, I am not affiliated with WD, just had good experience with these drives.
>1.2 Million Hours MTBF at 100% duty cycle and a five year warranty. Not bad.
That's good to hear, but MTBF is really a pie in the sky estimate. I had
an expensive HP tape drive that had something like 20,000 hr MTBF. Both of
my units failed at under 70 hours. HP's estimate was power on hours (unit
powered on and doing nothing), and did NOT include hours when the tape was
in motion. Sheesh.
To get the MTBF estimate, the manufacturer will power on 100 drives (or
more) and time to see when the first one fails. If it fails in 1000 hours,
then the MTBF is 100x1000hrs or 100,000 hours. This is far from being
accurate because as we all know, the older the drive, the more likely it is
to fail. (Especially after the warranty period has expired, failure rate is
quite high<g>).
I am hoping the newer SATA II drives will provide SCSI performance at a
reasonable price. It would be interesting to see if anyone has polled ISP's
The answer (short and based on experience) is NO! A SATA drive is no
different from an IDE drive of the same type. I'm sure they'll release
fast and reliable drives based on SATA with differenct mechanisms
(like the one Joshua pointed), but most will be IDE like with a
different interface, those high demand drives are fated to cost a lot
more.
to see what they're using. I know they charge more (or at least they used
to) for SCSI drives if you are renting a server from them. It would be
interesting to see what their failure rate is on IDE vs SCSI vs SATA.
That is something only an ISP or corporation would give (and no one
will EVER sign it, *lol*). SCSI has one more advantage I forgot to add
to my previous message, they can be arranged better in RAID with hot
swap. I can only tell about my company, where servers have all SCSI
disks (IBM, Dell).
--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
