Tracy R Reed wrote:
- - SCSI, FC, SATA, ATA are equally reliable (surprising and embarrassing to people who have spent big bucks on SCSI/FC but both studies came to the same conclusion based on 100,000 disks each)
While I'm certainly someone who advocates SATA in RAID 1, I'm unconvinced about the comparisons with SCSI.
I don't recall any of the studies actually using 10K SATA drives and comparing them to 10K SCSI drives. And, for 15K drives, the only option is still SCSI.
That means that they are likely comparing fairly new, large ATA 7200RPM drives to *significantly* older 7200RPM SCSI drives. That's a bit unfair.
Unfortunately google wussed out and won't tell us whose drives are the most/least reliable. The second study didn't mention this either. I guess they are afraid of getting sued.
Actually, I found the Google paper a prime example of academics creating a not terribly useful paper because it lacks details. They hide the raw data, it is difficult to reproduce, and it lacks predictive power.
We would be better off if they published the raw data without comment. -a -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
