Re: "big" machines running Debian?
- To: debian-amd64@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: "big" machines running Debian?
- From: Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>
- Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:26:56 -0600
- Message-id: <49AB8A40.6030304@cox.net>
- In-reply-to: <87myc70wu9.fsf@frosties.localdomain>
- References: <20090221130032.GX6748@tamarapatino.org> <52d26d930902210535w4262f10bn3107b58b7243b262@mail.gmail.com> <87d4d6eer9.fsf@frosties.localdomain> <20090225215411.GK3212@samad.com.au> <20090225220630.GX23244@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20090226003620.GA26041@samad.com.au> <87myc70wu9.fsf@frosties.localdomain>
On 02/28/2009 02:50 AM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
[snip]
The only argument I see for FC is a switched sorage network. As soon
as you dedicate a storage box to one (or two) servers there is really
no point in FC. Just use a SAS box with SATA disks inside. It is a)
faster, b) simpler, c) works better and d) costs a fraction.
The Tier 1 vendors can be touchy about certifying SATA SANs in
certain environments, especially 24x7 DCs. That's why only our
"tier 3" (there is not "tier 2"...) storage is SATA.
--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
The feeling of disgust at seeing a human female in a Relationship
with a chimp male is Homininphobia, and you should be ashamed of
yourself.
Reply to: