tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976686513564131325.post4125926808134757592..comments2024-03-17T15:34:05.492-06:00Comments on MPECS Inc. Blog: Repeat after me: SATA does not belong in servers.Philip Elder Cluster MVPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06082028960643490292noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976686513564131325.post-67892433064630016272013-05-10T12:39:46.211-06:002013-05-10T12:39:46.211-06:00Paul,
Our experience has been the opposite. I can...Paul,<br /><br />Our experience has been the opposite. I can count on one hand the number of Seagate SAS drives we've deployed over the last three or four years now that have DOAd or died in production.<br /><br />Yes, the 500GB ES series had that firmware bug. That really killed us.<br /><br />We use WD Black for backup rotations and are not really happy with the death rates on them so far but are reasonable for our expectations from SATA.<br /><br />On the whitebox side of things 600GB 10K Seagate SAS drives are <i>very</i> inexpensive. Tier 1 makes some of their bread and butter on storage so their prices are vastly more expensive.<br /><br />We run with RAID 6 with a few exceptions in servers (small spindle sets would be RAID 5). We do RAID 10 on SAN/DAS setups but are leaning towards RAID 6 in these circumstances as well.<br /><br />A number of storage vendors we work with and Cloud partners run with RAID 10 on their storage arrays as the hardware cost versus storage loss is a better risk at that level.<br /><br />PhilipPhilip Elder Cluster MVPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06082028960643490292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976686513564131325.post-70271579234890807752013-05-10T11:02:38.570-06:002013-05-10T11:02:38.570-06:00agree with you 100% but to expand I dont believe R...agree with you 100% but to expand I dont believe RAID 6 should be used unless absolutely necessary. RAID 10 in servers if possible and never RAID 5 (why IBM is still promoting something that Dell has stopped supporting is bewildering to me).Shayne Kawalilakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08560295057155864273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976686513564131325.post-54284500569418365132013-05-10T09:14:19.375-06:002013-05-10T09:14:19.375-06:00Can't really blame the failed hard disk if the...Can't really blame the failed hard disk if the AC system has been incorrectly installed/operated.<br /><br />I can genuinely say that I have had more SAS drives fail in servers that SATA. I don't know why, just the way it is. <br /><br />Most of our SATA based servers have WD Raid Edition disks, perhaps it's the Seagate's that are the culprit? I only buy WD drives not due to high failure rates in seagates.<br /><br />SAS v SATA will always e a big debate, price conscious clients will always go for SATA. I have one client with aout 6T of data (architects) and they couldn't afford SAS based servers.<br /><br />As always, YMMV.<br />:)Paulnoreply@blogger.com