Re: SATA drive reccomendations for reliablity (server use)
Drives go bad. Some drives go bad sooner than others. In our experience
right now drives in teh 250-500GB range have a pretty high reliability if
they're perpendicular recording, 120-160 if your'e talking about linear
drives. Many manufacturers now make "Enterprise" editions of their drives
which (at least supposedly) have a much higher MTBF. Either due to higher
initial quality rating, or software/firmware differences that cause them to
be more cautious in how they write data.
I wouldn't go over 500GB for enterprise needs right now. Also, remember
that these large drives are relatively slow. The IOs/Gb and MB/s/Gb has
gone down drastically, not up. So if you've any sort of I/O intensive
application you might want too look at still smaller spindles, and more of
them (and yes, at an increased $/Gb, $/Gb is obviously NOT the only
--On August 2, 2008 5:36:23 PM -0600 Scott Edwards <email@example.com>
I have two servers that I will buy two to six drives a piece for
(each). I'm thinking 750gb is the sweet spot for storage prices.
I know everyone has had a drive go bad. I'm not interested in endless
stories of how yours was bad, how you lost your lifes work, or why
you'll never buy from vendor X just to spite them.
I'm looking for larger scale independent third party testing and
certification of SATA and SATA II drives released on the market,
geared for server use. I want to use this to make a comparison of
where price, performance, and reliablity make the best for our needs.
If any of the existing hardware matters, here is the hardware I am
considering for running XEN. I haven't decided if I will stick with
the etch kernel, or jump into a newer mainline release.
Intel 4 port gigabit server adapter. EXPI9404PT
2 GHZ QC optron cpus
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Modwest Operations Manager
Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting