Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble <at> Sun.COM> writes: > > Bottom line here is that when it comes to making statements about SATA > vs SAS, there are ONLY two statements which are currently absolute: > > (1) a SATA drive has better GB/$ than a SAS drive > (2) a SAS drive has better throughput and IOPs than a SATA drive
Yes, and to represent statements (1) and (2) in a more exhaustive table: Best X per Y | Dollar Watt Rack Unit (or "per drive") ---------------+------------------------------------------- Capacity | SATA(1) SATA SATA Throughput | SATA SAS SAS(2) IOPS | SATA SAS SAS(2) If (a) people understood that each of these 9 performance numbers can be measured independently from each other, and (b) knew which of these numbers matter for a given workload (very often multiple of them do, so a compromise has to be made), then there would be no more circular SATA vs. SAS debates. -marc _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
