"Poor" man's NAS

[A. Khattri]

On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, Michael Hipp wrote:

> Are SATA drives now considered to be "server quality". Conventional
> wisdom is that only SCSI is good enough for "real" production servers.

Well this is a poor man's NAS right? ;-)

Seriously though, the gap in performance between SATA and U320 SCSI is
pretty small these days. Using a RAID controller with separate channels
for each drive gives you a lot of bandwidth (hence the 12 channel RAID
card my friend is using).

> I need to build a server somewhat like you're spec'ing so the question
> isn't just academic. And the price of even one TB of SCSI makes me feel faint.

Yeah, our supplier only sells 75Gb (and larger) SCSI drives and those are
very pricey - at a certain point RAID cards and SATA drives become a
better option despite the slight drop in performance.


-- 
A