From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 13 14:37:41 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008374A7;
 Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:37:40 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCE818FC13;
 Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:37:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBDEbU2I003834;
 Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:37:31 +0100 (CET)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
 by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id qBDEbUvg003831;
 Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:37:30 +0100 (CET)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:37:30 +0100 (CET)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD for serious performance?
In-Reply-To: <50C9DABA.1020008@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212131534570.3825@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <20121211204323.310760@gmx.com>
 <CAJ-Vmok-DtKwNW2DJ21E_UBcf+3CWHJ0Z8FyiNC=mycKUFNuBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <50C889D3.1050404@freebsd.org>
 <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212122324230.1449@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
 <50C9DABA.1020008@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:37:31 +0100 (CET)
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:37:41 -0000

> There is no technical reason that SATA drives are less reliable with
> regard to hardware (bit density, BER, ...) and firmware (less strict
> conformance testing compared to SAS drives), but there are market
> forces that have this effect.

The only sentence i could agree.

But actually it is mostly propaganda to sell nearly same thing at 5x 
price.