[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
RE: SATA vs EIDE Hard drives for a file server
- Subject: RE: SATA vs EIDE Hard drives for a file server
- From: "christopher purves" <CHRIS_PURVES@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 09:57:37 +0000
I think the question for raid is sata vs scsi really. All our machines at
work still use scsi for reliability. We would expect a 5tb stack with scsi
disks to lose 1 disk per year on average. I imagine with ata (PATA or SATA)
failures are much more frequent.
Chris
>From: "noel_pilot" <HA@xxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subject: [ukha_d] SATA vs EIDE Hard drives for a file server
>Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:17:50 -0000
>
>Hey all,
>Looking to build my first proper file server similar to the one in
>Marks guide.
>Hard drives are coming via a friend from the states so very nice
>prices e.g. $145 for 320Gb either SATA or EIDE. (approx £79!!)
>
>Opinions on the benefits or drawbacks of either method.
>I know SATA has hot swappability but I dont seem to have seen as many
>caddies available.
>Probably looking eventually at around 6 to 8 drives for around 2Tb!
>Thanks all,
>Noel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
UKHA_D Main Index |
UKHA_D Thread Index |
UKHA_D Home |
Archives Home
|