Kyle McDonald wrote:
Richard Elling wrote:
roland wrote:
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
Can anyone comment on the claims or conclusions of the article itself?
It seems to me that they are not always clear about what they are
Richard Elling wrote:
roland wrote:
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
Can anyone comment on the claims or conclusions of the article itself?
It seems to me that they are not always clear about what they are
talking about.
Man
roland wrote:
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
it`s about sata vs. sas/scsi realiability , telling that typical desktop sata drives
".on average experience an Unrecoverable Error every 12.5 terabytes written or read (EUR of
On 13-Jan-07, at 11:52 AM, roland wrote:
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
it`s about sata vs. sas/scsi realiability , telling that typical
desktop sata drives
".on average experience an Unrecoverable Error every 12.5
te
On 1/13/07, roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
it`s about sata vs. sas/scsi realiability , telling that typical desktop sata
drives
".on average experience an Unrecoverable Error every 12.5 te
i have come across an interesting article at :
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2859&p=5
it`s about sata vs. sas/scsi realiability , telling that typical desktop sata
drives
".on average experience an Unrecoverable Error every 12.5 terabytes written
or read (EUR of 1 in 1014 bit