Results 1 to 10 of 10
-
12-20-2007, 12:22 PM #1Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Posts
- 14
4 SATAII with raid6 or 2 SCSI iwth raid 1 ?
Hi,
we want to build a server and prevent the io,
and we hope it has backup feature with raid.
we have two option to think,
the first is four SATAII HDD with raid 6,
and the second is two SCSI HDD(10K)with raid 1,
to prevent the io problem,
which plan will be better?
Thanks
-
12-20-2007, 01:41 PM #2
If you have alot of writes, use raid 10, you will get full redundancy and fast read/write speeds.
DanDaniel Pautz - WebNX, Inc. dan >< WebNX.com
WebNX.com Enterprise Hosting Solutions – Southern California (Premium Equinix Based DC), Northern Utah (Large 120k Sq' WebNX ran) and NYC Based Servers
High end Dedicated Servers at reasonable prices on a Premium network with 9x providers route optimized with the Noction IRP
-
12-20-2007, 01:46 PM #3Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Posts
- 14
-
12-20-2007, 01:54 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- L.A., CA
- Posts
- 3,710
RAID-10 with SATA2 drives will be faster
EasyDCIM.com - DataCenter Infrastructure Management - HELLO DEDICATED SERVER & COLO PROVIDERS! - Reach Me: chris@easydcim.com
Bandwidth Billing | Inventory & Asset Management | Server Control
Order Forms | Reboots | IPMI Control | IP Management | Reverse&Forward DNS | Rack Management
-
12-20-2007, 02:00 PM #5Newbie
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Posts
- 14
-
12-21-2007, 12:50 AM #6Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
- Location
- Hong Kong
- Posts
- 195
If you are going to prevent the I/O problem but not sololy to the read/write transfer rate. Then SCSI should always be the first priority but it also depends on how good of your SATA/SCSI controller because this is also important and 10Krpm maybe can't show you the true power of SCSI.
No matter how fast of SATA is, SCSI is still better under extreme environment. In my personal experiences, hosting who used with SCSI all provides good stability.
-
12-21-2007, 01:20 AM #7Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
- Location
- Hong Kong
- Posts
- 195
It's rather hard to compare low-end SCSI RAID with high-end SATA RAID, they are not at the parallel level. In this case, I believe that most of the time SATA RAID will perform better but when you are facing a mission critical heavy loading situation and come to the I/O problem, SCSI win hands down.
It depends by your personal preference, so there is no best answer out there. Some guys just want to have the fastest possible speed. To me, I would rather like a more predictable and stable environment while slower in the normal day works.
-
12-21-2007, 02:10 AM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- SF Bay Area
- Posts
- 879
-
12-21-2007, 02:21 AM #9Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Location
- Seattle, WA
- Posts
- 490
Rather than just comparing SATA vs SCSI with an equal number of drives, many people are comparing what they can do for a similar price point.
Having twice the number of SATA drives as SCSI drives as is the scenario proposed by the OP will usually give the SATA drives the throughput advantage. The SCSI or SAS drives will still probably have lower random seek times.
-
12-21-2007, 02:21 AM #10Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
- Location
- Hong Kong
- Posts
- 195
Well, I definitely toward to the SCSI too since I use it from SCSI2(like 5 or 10M I don't really remember the old day).
But you need to read the thread clearly first as I'm not going to repeat it all over again. We are comparing the lowest-end SCSI RAID with SATA RAID6/10.