[Beowulf] SATA vs SCSI drives
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
H.Vidal, Jr. hvidal at tesseract-tech.comSun Oct 10 09:01:37 PDT 2004
- Previous message: [Beowulf] rsh don't see the real variables
- Next message: [Beowulf] SATA vs SCSI drives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hello all. We are building some Network Area Storage gear around some high-end imaging and data acq. systems. Reliability for storage of this data is a big time must. To date, we have built all of this lab's gear around SCSI drives because it has been our research and experience that SCSI drives are better built than IDE drives. However, when looking at these drive arrays and NAS appliances, it is very clear that SATA drives are really driving large scale storage. What has been the general experience on this list of SATA vs SCSI in terms of performance, reliability, quoted as well as real-world failure rates, etc? Which SATA drives are considered 'the best' the way, say Seagate drives are held in high esteem for SCSI? And, if anybody likes any particular RAID and/or NAS system, let's hear your stories. About 1.4-1.7 Terabyte raw space. Thanks for your collective help and attention. Hernando Vidal, Jr. Tesseract Technology
- Previous message: [Beowulf] rsh don't see the real variables
- Next message: [Beowulf] SATA vs SCSI drives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
