On 21/11/2005, at 5:42 PM, Barry Lollo wrote:
Peter & Greg,
I'm not certain about the "Continuous use" statement, that may very
well
be a fact, but one major reason for the Raid Edition of SATA, was
error
correction.
Yep, but according to WD, it's seconds not milliseconds:
"What is time-limited error recovery and why do I need it?
Desktop drives are designed to go to great lengths to protect and
recover data, at times pausing for as much as a few minutes to make
sure that data is recovered. Inside a RAID system where the RAID
controller handles error recovery, the drive does not need to pause
for extended periods to recover data. In fact, heroic error recovery
attempts can cause a RAID system to think the drive has failed and
drop it out of the array. WD Caviar RE is engineered to prevent hard
drive error recovery fallout by limiting the time the drive spends in
error recovery. With error recovery factory set to 7 seconds, the
drive has time to attempt a recovery, allow the RAID controller to
log the error, and still stay online."
My opinion on drives changes with time - I've seen horrible batches
from Seagate, IBM and Samsung from memory - the Seagate one was by
far the worst - the Barracuda II had a failure rate of over 50% which
at the time did a lot of damage to my business.
We generally use Seagate for workstations because of the better
warranty, but stopped using them on servers since there were
performance issues with SATA RAID on Linux - these have probably been
fixed by now.
Peter.
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
