[ILUG] How useful are NAS devices aimed at home users?

[Robert Kiely]

Hey,

Not sure how relevant this is since I don't believe this paper talks
about SATA or SCSI but some of you might find this interesting
reading.

http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf

Rgds,
Rob

2008/11/21 Darragh Bailey <felix at compsoc.nuigalway.ie>:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 08:45:45PM +0000, Ivan Griffin wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Darragh Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> SATA drives don't have as low error rates as SCSI disks, and with the
>>> size of the SATA disks increasing, the chances of an error occuring
>>> during a rebuilt is getting uncomfortably higher.
>>>
>>
>> Just a point on this - SATA or SCSI refers to the drive electronics and
>> interface, and not necessarily the quality of the build.
>>
>> Having said that, traditionally enterprise drives came with SCSI
>> interfaces (as SCSI was more powerful/expensive than ATA) and this
>> established the mindset that SCSI drives are better.
>>
>> You can also purchase enterprise-grade SATA drives.
>
> That's true, but the URE rates for the SATA drives are typically higher,
> even for enterprise level.
>
> Quick look at seagate:
> Enterprise SATA: 10^14 (SV35.4)
> Enterprise SAS : 10^16 (Savvio 10K.2)
> Enterprise SCSI: 10^16 (Cheetah(R) 15K.6)
>
> WD seems a little better:
> Enterprise SATA: 10^15 (WD RE3) (WD VelociRaptor)
>
>
> Experience also tells me that disks purchased at the same time, have an
> annoying habbit of failing in multiples :).
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ivan.
>
> --
> Darragh
>
> "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool."
> --
> Irish Linux Users' Group mailing list
> About this list : http://mail.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug
> Who we are : http://www.linux.ie/
> Where we are : http://www.linux.ie/map/
>