<Stupid blonde alert>
I personally have SATA experience in the tower/desktop world but none in
the rack units. Are the physical connections any stronger in the rack
world?
I like SCSI and IDE not only for their proven track record [server and
desktop respectively] but because the dang cables don't get knocked off
each time I reach into the case. Those cable connections on the back of
the SATA drives are a little worrying. I've accidentally bumped the
connection off my workstation at home twice while adding the Happauge
card and what not.
In SBSland early on we had issues with them getting loaded up, if they
are underpowered, we're seeing a bit of bottlenecks, and as one of the
SBS support gang said out of Mothership Los Colinas, if your vendor
won't guarantee that equipment for 3 years, do you really want to put
that data on that device?
So far the SATAs that we have running around in SBSland servers are
okay, but I'll report back in another 2 years and let you know.
I can't speak for the Dell rack stuff, but the Dell tower stuff...lemme
just say I'm glad Brian steered me towards HP.
Rob MOIR wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Mulnick
Sent: 07 November 2005 15:13
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Hardware Suggestions
Bottom line, I would guess that two HP 360's (SCSI; I haven't
been made comfortable with SATA reliability yet) or 140's
with 1GB of memory each would be more than needed based on
those parameters.
I'm glad to hear someone else say this. SATA can work but you need to
look closely at what you're buying and what the manufacturer recommends.
If the manufacturer doesn't trust their own products for the sort of
24*7 hammering you often get in a server then why bet against them? Who
are we to assume we know a product better than the people who designed
and built it?
If you virtualize anything on top of that,
some other considerations would be needed of course. (or Dell
or IBM equivalent of course).
I'd still personally be uncomfortable with virtualising all my DCs, even
onto different physical virtual server hosts, I just don't believe in
adding extra layers of complexity to fundamental network services if I
can help it.
--
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
http://www.threatcode.com
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
