Thus Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des_at_des.no> spake Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:56:58 +0100: > Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst_at_clara.net> writes: > > Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav (des_at_des.no) writes: > > > Not cost-effective? What is the "street price" of 16 GB disk > > > space these days? About the same as a couple of Big Macs? > > That's roughly half of a common 36G SCSI drive, and still a fairly > > significant chunk of a 73G one. Granted, you probably don't get all > > that many high-memory systems with just one or two dinky disks. > > Don't blame me for your decision to use the most expensive type of > storage available, especially when it has been conclusively shown that > expensive server-grade disks are no more reliable than cheap consumer- > grade disks. Hm. During the last ten years I for myself installed about 1,200 SCSI HDs at customers (plus those that were installed by EMC in storage systems at customers' sites) and at least thrice the amount IDE/SATA HDs. There were hundreds (!) of defects of the consumer grade IDE/SATA HDs, beautifully spreading over the whole spectrum of brands and models used. Number of SCSI drives dead: Nine. I tend to believe there *is* a reason for companies to build SCSI/SAS-only products, be it 'Workstations', Workstations, Servers or storage systems. YMMV, though. > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des_at_des.no TimoReceived on Sat Feb 16 2008 - 16:07:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:27 UTC