https://slotsdad.com/ - casino online slots

SATA and SAS

by Administrator on January 25, 2006

We will shortly have our second SAS array in the lab and hope that it performs better than the one we already have. As previously feared, there are microcode issues with some of the early SAS controllers we have been seeing. Apparently, the presence of a standard has not dissuaded some vendors from adding proprietary foo to their equipment.

I keep getting pinged by folks regarding the differences between SATA and SAS. Is SATA full duplex? Is it enterprise-ready (whatever that means)? Do the drives really shake so much that over the course of the evening the drives will shake themselves out of the array cabinet and end up in a pile on the floor? The answers are, in order, no, who knows?, and bullshit.

A good debate between Fujitsu and Western Digital on the relative merits of the technologies can be found here.

End of line.

{ 1 trackback }

URL
November 21, 2012 at 12:16 am

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Mike January 25, 2006 at 11:39 am

Hi Jon:

We constantly get asked about the relative performance of FC to SATA drives, because NetApp is pushing the SATA option to provide a lower cost solution to their customers on the FAS3000 series. Our customers would like to see valid, verifiable and repeatable data on the performance between a NetApp Filer with FC drives and one with SATA drives. In the NetApp case, I wonder if the NVRAM card takes up the slack caused by the half duplex SATA drives? Maybe it doesn’t matter on a lightly loaded filer, with few users. However, the FAS3000 is marketed & sold as a high performance unit, not as a disk to disk back up device.

Mike

Administrator January 25, 2006 at 3:54 pm

This sounds like a question to throw at Dave Hitz on his blog.

Previous post:

Next post: