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?"

2 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Don't use Promise, for one thing by b00m3rang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Promise and Highpoint (and any other cheap raid card) in my experience are no more than an IDE card with RAID software that eats up CPU cycles. Recovery options for a lost drive member are usually limited and unreliable. If you want reasonable reliability, go with one of the drives that uses SCSI hardware adapted to an SATA interface (such as WD Raptor). I would personally recommend Adaptec for your host controller needs, as they do the RAID in hardware.

  2. Don't Confuse by Crypt0pimP · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The connection technology with the drive / spindle quality.

    (P)ATA and SATA are connection technologies.
    They have their individual benefits and drawbacks
    (cost, reliability, speed)

    The real factors to consider are the details of the drives themselves - vibration dampening, bearing and motor quality, MTBF.

    It used to be rather simple to guess what quality of drive you were buying. If it was 146GB or less (73GB, 36GB), and rotational speed was 10K or 15K, it was either SCSI or FC, and an "enterprise" class drive, rated in Mean Time Between Failure.

    Good drive, high quality, expect it to last several years, spinning 24 hours a day, sustaining high read and write activity during production and backup hours.

    If the drive was larger (200GB+) and slower (7200 RPM), typically an ATA drive, maybe low end SCSI.

    Then it was, at best, a workstation class drive, rated in "Contact Start Stops", meaning how many spin-ups and shutdowns the drive should survive. Not meant to run 24 hours a day, and run under heavy load except for short periods.

    The lines are beginning to blur with 300 - 500 GB drives with FC drive attachment. Those drives are meant for archiving and reference data. Not production databases and such.

    In my personal experience, the 3Ware products are worth the premium.

    Pick your attachment technology as appropriate.

    Best of Luck,
    Patrick (slineyp at hotmail dot com)

    --
    Striving to achieve a lower state of conciousness