Re: Extra drives
Re: Extra drives
- Subject: Re: Extra drives
- From: email@hidden (Michael Sullivan)
- Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 12:43:31 -0400
- Organization: Society for the Incurably Pompous
email@hidden (John C. Welch) writes:
>
On 05/08/2002 09:33, "Scott McCarty" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> I am one of the most staunch advocates on this list for building
>
> using only SCSI drives. I will concede that ATA drives are OK for
>
> your server if you only have a few users or server usage is not heavy.
>
> The fact that you are in an education environment implies a lot of
>
> users. That may not be the case for the server in question, but I
>
> would avoid ATA storage on a busy server with more than a handful of
>
> users. In heavy usage, ATA drives choke on their inability to handle
>
> concurrent I/O. It is more than just a performance issue.
>
ARG...it's not the *drive* that chokes, it's the *BUS*. That's an important
>
difference. I have used, and seen used, ATA drives attached to a SCSI bus
>
RAID system under *INSANE* heavy usage, and they *never* choke.
>
The ATA Bus is what you need to avoid, not the drives.
Isn't there an ATA bus in the system when you have a SCSI/ATA RAID?
Each drive is connected to the SCSI RAID controller system through an
ATA bus, no?
Clearly this should be better than a straight single bus ATA RAID, but
if you had a lot of hits to the same physical drive at once, wouldn't it
cause the same problem?
Michael
--
Michael Sullivan
Business Card Express of CT Thermographers to the Trade
Cheshire, CT email@hidden
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.