Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:17:10 -0700 From: "Kory Hamzeh" <kory@avatar.com> To: "Charles Burns" <burnscharlesn@hotmail.com>, <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: reliable HDD brand (LONG) Message-ID: <001701c14839$06b8e1c0$14ce21c7@avatar.com> In-Reply-To: <F125IHYtLvW0YJV12Dp000096f4@hotmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Why is SCSI more reliable than, say IDE, when SCSI dictates the host interface? Is the actual data encoding on the platter any more reliable? Is the drive spindle motor or head servo any more reliable? I use to run SCSI exclusively, but I had so much trouble, specially when the Ultra-Wide stuff came out that I switched to IDE. Other then one problem with the IBM 75GXP 45G, IDE was been more reliable for me than SCSI. I agree they are not as fast as IDE. Kory > > > In general, if you want reliability, go SCSI, mirroring IDE or, RAID5 IDE > and have a hot spare. If you want enterprise reliability (which > you probably > don't if you were considering IDE drives) get a solid state > drive. They are > usually above USD$25,000. Ouch. (These things are also blazing > fast as far > as access time--great for that "special" 5% of files on a big file server) > > > Charles N Burns > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001701c14839$06b8e1c0$14ce21c7>