Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- From: "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 11:08:35 -0800
Les - SAS is a very wise choice. It's where I'll be going as we move forward. They are fast and they are designed for server use.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
"Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]" <les.connor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:OXncd5d$GHA.4604@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I just deployed a server with SAS drives. I'm hoping the technology is reliable - it's certainly fast :-). The choice was between SCSI or SAS, SATA wasn't considered. The SAS drives/raid controllers offer a degree of configuration flexibility not previously available - and as SAS is touted as the technology that will replace SCIS, the choice was made.
I did have 1 of 8 drives fail within a week, but obviously that can't be considered significant at this early stage.
--
Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]
-----------------------------------------------------------
SBS Rocks !
----------------------
"Tell me and I'll forget. Show me and I'll remember. Involve me and I'll understand." - Confucius
"SimonR" <Simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:uzT7abd$GHA.5068@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSCSI
IDE/SATA is fine for TOYS!!
The drives are NOT designed for 24/7 x 365 use and they are slow (7200RPM)
Western Digital produce RAPTOR drives - these are FASTER 10K RPM (speed) and designed for 24/7 x 365
I always recommend SCSI - having said that my Server uses IDE - but its a TOY!
If budget is low just use 2 drive in Mirror (RAID-1) setup
and finally - TAPE backup don't use USB HDD
for what they cost I replace tapes every year - the old ones get used for MONTH END backup
*** You can't have too many backups ***
"Michael Tovey" <michael.spamtovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:2676FC05-A260-490F-8166-7BEC5833068D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxHello,
I have just had another SATA HDD crash on me in my SBS- 2003 STD server and
I was wondering!
Have any other people had problems with SATA when used to hold data in their
SBS server.
I have been told by a furm that we sometime use when I get a bit tight on
time that SATA is NO good to be used on Data servers and that we NEED SCSI
Raid 5!
We have about 10GB MAX on the disks and only about 12 people accessing, and
maybe only 5 at the same time!
What do you all think??????
--
SBS 2003 - Admin
SVR 2003 - Admin
SQL 2005 - Admin
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- From: Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]
- Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- References:
- Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- From: SimonR
- Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- From: Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]
- Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- Prev by Date: Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- Next by Date: Re: Virtualization... can the vitrtual machine be scheduled - up AND down?
- Previous by thread: Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- Next by thread: Re: ????SATA or SCSI????
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading