Slashdot Mirror
SATA vs ATA?
An anonymous reader asks: "I have a client that needs a server with quite a bit of storage, reasonable level of reliability and redundancy and all for as cheap as possible. In other words they need a server with a RAID array using a number or large hard drives. Since SCSI is still more expensive than ATA (or SATA), I'm looking to using either an ATA or a SATA RAID controller from Promise Technologies. While I had initially was planning on using SATA drives, I have read some material recently to make me rethink that decision and stick with ATA drives.
What kind of experiences (good and bad) have people had with SATA drives as compared to ATA drives, especially in a server type environment?"
If you were to build a system that comprised 9 Hitachi 7200RPM 400GB drives, you would acheive 100GB more storage space for 3,600$ plus the cost of the server it was hosted in.
Plus the power supplies (dual redundant) and cooling systems (dual redundant) and controllers (dual redundant) and the case to house it all!
That's an awful lot of stuff to just hand-wave away. Not to mention the time and labor required to build and support the fucking thing.
But inexpensive compared to a self-built solution it is NOT.
The point here is that a "self-built solution" (what is that, one that builds itself?) will be cheaper, but not by nearly as much as you estimated. The only way to get it down to a price that approaches the figures you made up (let's be honest here) is to slash key features and capabilities until you get to the target price point.
Sorry, but in a large storage system redundant power supplies are not an option. Redundant fans are not an option. Redundant controllers are certainly not an option.
I write in my journal
The reason Apple's machines are so expensive...
Xserve RAID is, by far, the cheapest RAID system in its class. By "in its class" I mean "of comparable capacity and reliability." And reliability is simply not an optional thing in this context. You have to have it. You can't get it by scrounging parts from your dad's junk drawer.
They charge 5999$ for a model with 4x250GB drives, and 10999$...
The dollar sign goes in front of the figure, not behind it. Basic literacy isn't too much to ask, I hope?
Now, if Apple were to sell a model with NO DRIVES (So we could fill it ourselves)
Heh. That's good. That's funny. Run along and play now, you fucking amateur. Leave the discussion of business-class RAID systems to the grown-ups.
I write in my journal
I don't recall asking what you like. There's a right and a wrong, and you're wrong.
And I don't recall telling you that I care. You're free to whine about it, of course, but I'm not quite sure what point that serves.
Firmware. If you require more explanation than this, then you're so far out of your depth that I can't even see you from here.
Try not to be quite so patronizing, it doesn't fit you well. I'm going to combine this with your next comment and ask you to provide proof. Your "Because I said so" response isn't sufficient. If you are going to insist that I'm incompetent, by all means, I may very well be. So PROVE it. Link to official Apple content showing that the drives use custom firmware, and that you can't place any other drive inside of an Apple Drive Module. You do that and I'll freely admit that I'm ill informed. I will, of course, be able to take solace in the fact that you have proven yourself to have the maturity of a young child, despite your superior knowledge.