Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:51:38 +1000 From: Fraser Tweedale <frase@frase.id.au> To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new server motherboard with SATA II Message-ID: <20080627035137.GA9582@bacardi> In-Reply-To: <486450DB.4000907@dannysplace.net> References: <486450DB.4000907@dannysplace.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:30:51PM +1000, Danny Carroll wrote: > Hello all, >=20 > I'm looking to set up a file server at our office. It's a small office= =20 > so price is a concern. Performance is also going to be important. >=20 > The data will be replicated from another site so integrity of the data=20 > is not paramount. For this reason I think I'll be able to run with ZFS.= =20 > I see it as a good opportunity to contribute to getting ZFS stable and= =20 > non-experimental. >=20 > What I am really concerned about is the SATA support. >=20 > If I look at AMD64 as an arch, does anyone have any experience with good= =20 > IO chipsets that can do full SATA-300? >=20 > I don't mind if it is a on-board or if I get a good controller card so=20 > long as I can get decent performance out of the Seagate Barracuda=20 > 7200.11 drives. >=20 > I'd be willing to go with intel arch although from a ZFS perspective it= =20 > sounds like AMD64 is better. >=20 > -D Intel ICH-9 works a treat; I run a combination of SATA-300 and SATA-150 drives on an ICH-9 southbridge, and have never had an issue. --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkhkY8kACgkQPw/2FZbemTWUgwCdFsLb6epha04oT4AAIGoAUSdU WzQAn3XFfeb9CXRoiBZIgmkQ/2OHk4WN =Alrk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080627035137.GA9582>