Results 1 to 25 of 42
Thread: 15K SAS Drives are Good?
-
11-13-2011, 02:23 AM #1Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- WorldWide
- Posts
- 87
15K SAS Drives are Good?
Dear,
On so many forums like WHT , many of the users disliked the 15K SAS drives.
Please give your expert opinion about this one.
Should we go for it or should use SCSI/Normal Sata H.D.D's
Thanks!
-
11-13-2011, 02:24 AM #2Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 7,325
There's no way to answer this without knowing what you're doing. 15K SAS drives are the best hard drives for high IO workloads.
-
11-13-2011, 02:28 AM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
11-13-2011, 02:29 AM #4Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 7,325
-
11-13-2011, 03:18 AM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- CA
- Posts
- 9,350
〓〓 RackNerd LLC - Introducing Infrastructure Stability
〓〓 Dedicated Servers, Private Cloud, DRaaS, Colocation, VPS, DDoS Mitigation, Shared & Reseller Hosting
〓〓 www.linkedin.com/in/dustincisneros/
〓〓 My fancy email dustin@racknerd.com
-
11-13-2011, 03:20 AM #6Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- WorldWide
- Posts
- 87
Yes we know that SAS is better.But heard that it got complaints.
Means more complains then Sata?
-
11-13-2011, 03:22 AM #7Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- WorldWide
- Posts
- 87
-
11-13-2011, 04:04 AM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- CA
- Posts
- 9,350
SAS are great, but of course if you can(budget wise) why not go for some SSD?
Also running/planning any type of RAID Config?
〓〓 RackNerd LLC - Introducing Infrastructure Stability
〓〓 Dedicated Servers, Private Cloud, DRaaS, Colocation, VPS, DDoS Mitigation, Shared & Reseller Hosting
〓〓 www.linkedin.com/in/dustincisneros/
〓〓 My fancy email dustin@racknerd.com
-
11-13-2011, 04:11 AM #9The Linux Specialist
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Location
- /root
- Posts
- 23,990
I don't hate SAS 15K. Still a good drive for me.
Specially 4 U
Reseller Hosting: Boost Your Websites | Fully Managed KVM VPS: 3.20 - 5.00 Ghz, Pure Dedicated Power
JoneSolutions.Com is on the net 24/7 providing stable and reliable web hosting solutions, server management and services since 2001
Debian|Ubuntu|cPanel|DirectAdmin|Enhance|Webuzo|Acronis|Estela|BitNinja|Nginx
-
11-13-2011, 05:09 AM #10Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 220
I'd even prefer SAS 15k than SSD (good server grade ssd is still pretty expensive)
-
11-13-2011, 05:54 AM #11Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Posts
- 444
That's right, you have to go with SAS and even better with RAID.
-
11-13-2011, 10:58 AM #12Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 493
15 sas is great when you need a lot of writes and a medium amount of space and more iops than 7200rpm sata can handle. I've yet to find a use case that has these properties.
Sata works great for lots of data lots of writes and the least amount of iops.
Consumer SSD's are great for lots of reads and bursts of writes they can not handle lots of writes without being replaced frequently. And yes we have already run into this and had to adjust our contracts to penalize clients that wanted to abuse consumer level ssd's.
Enterprise SSD's great for everything but amounts of space for the price and price in general.
The most common use case we see are servers that need bursts of rapid IO's or lots of iops to a small amount of there overall data. A mixed use of cache or hybrid ssd storage, cache is a good fit for the busty and hybrid for the constant hot data. Besides replacing SAS drives that failed or direct customer requests were not buying sas drives. They are not the best fit for any use case we can come up with.
The performance difference that a couple hundred bucks for a pair of Intel 311's adds to a typical 4 drive raid 10 of sata drives has them outperform a similar number of sas drives for nearly anything but a 100% data random read and write pattern that's consistent 24/7.
-
11-13-2011, 11:18 AM #13Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 10
SAS drives are good
-
11-13-2011, 02:30 PM #14Eternal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 10,710
Where have you read complaints about 15K SAS?
Generally, these hard disks are pretty highly regarded both in terms of performance and reliability. We use 15K SAS on the majority of our servers currently and have no complaints. You may also want to look at SSDs, but depending on your needs 15K SAS is not a bad choice.MediaLayer, LLC - www.medialayer.com Learn how we can make your website load faster, translating to better conversion rates for your business!
The pioneers of optimized web hosting, featuring LiteSpeed Web Server & SSD Storage - Celebrating 10 Years in Business
-
11-13-2011, 02:49 PM #15Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
- Posts
- 5,105
-
11-13-2011, 03:14 PM #16I route, therefore I am
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Location
- Good question
- Posts
- 697
Running a database on SSDs = stupid.
-
11-13-2011, 03:50 PM #17Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,533
I have not heard any complaints about SAS drives. Mind linking specifically where people are complaining about them?
SAS drives usually provide about double the performance with half the access time and is generally noticeable. The only real reason a lot of providers don't use them is they are trying to make as much profit as possible and try to offer the world for a penny and can't afford them. I'm actually running two 15k SAS drives in raid 1 and am getting pretty awesome performance compared to a raid 10 sata setup. While not identical it is pretty nice.
What is stupid about it? As long as backups are made and raid is used it can be cheaper. Some people are replacing 16+ drives for a couple of ssd's and getting amazing performance out of them. The only major reliability issues should be from people buying low end drives.
-
11-13-2011, 04:26 PM #18Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 1,765
Consumer level SSDs (MLC devices, specifically) have a limited number of writes in their life time, so that is one reason to shy away from using those particular devices over something tried and tested like an array of 15K SAS drives.
SLC devices (e.g. Intel X-25E) and FusionIO is a different matter, but it's not economically feasible to use those in all but the most specialised of circumstances (we have clients using them, but they are heavy database users).Darren Lingham - Stablepoint Hosting
Stablepoint - Cloud Web Hosting without compromise
We provide industry-leading cPanel™ web hosting in 80+ global cities.
-
11-13-2011, 04:47 PM #19Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 493
Because you do not like at least an order of magnitude better io performance? Do you mean consumer grade MLC SSD's? I'll agree with that. Otherwise people that needed fast databases have been running them on solid state storage since the 90's at least. A lot of what made EMC, IBM and other big boy SAN's as fast as they were was a pile of solid state cache.
-
11-13-2011, 06:30 PM #20WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 136
-
11-13-2011, 07:05 PM #21
Your post would be the first I have heard of people not liking 15k SAS. Please show me links to all the complaints you speak of. They are about the best there is for reliability and performance. Ssd will be faster but reliability is still somewhat still to be proven on a broad scale based on their newness.
-
11-13-2011, 07:25 PM #22Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Posts
- 667
-
11-13-2011, 08:01 PM #23Hello World
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Location
- /etc/my.cnf
- Posts
- 10,657
-
11-13-2011, 08:38 PM #24WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 136
-
11-26-2011, 02:02 PM #25Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 220
And would that help more than a 15k SAS if you have many people writing at the same time?
Let say with 4 HDD SATA 7.2k RAID 10 you'd have 200MB/s shared among 10 people
with 4 HDD SAS 15 k RAID 10 400MB/s shared amond 10 people.
In those cases the write speed would be more or less divided by the number of people writing, right?
Now imagine than with the SSD cache you'd have (with 2x311 RAID 1) 100MB/s - how would that react to 10 people writing at the same time? Good I/O speed or would it be divided by 10 (for example)?
(I'd like to test that myself but don't have the gear available)
Thanks!
Similar Threads
-
12 SATAII or 6 SAS 15k drives?
By HostHatch_AR in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 6Last Post: 08-09-2011, 05:16 PM -
2.5 15K SAS hard drives reliability
By paladinstrike in forum Colocation, Data Centers, IP Space and NetworksReplies: 8Last Post: 03-15-2011, 05:44 PM -
Read Blocks Per Second I/O SAS 15K Drives Question
By john3003 in forum Colocation, Data Centers, IP Space and NetworksReplies: 3Last Post: 12-06-2010, 06:49 PM -
VPS providers using 15K SCSI/SAS drives in RAID10 on their servers?
By jscieza in forum VPS HostingReplies: 17Last Post: 01-04-2010, 02:32 PM -
15k RPM SAS Drives For Sale
By IGXHost in forum Other Web Hosting Related OffersReplies: 5Last Post: 12-19-2009, 07:40 AM