On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 18:33 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > SCSI is *expensive*.
Yup. SCSI's way expensive. But he said *top*. And per disk, everything I know and have read says top == SCSI. Top everything; speed, reliability, price... But Gene Heskett is probably right that a slew of parallel SATAs would be more reliable -- done right, you'd (almost) always get warning when you're about to lose your disk storage. And no matter how reliable a single drive is, it can fail suddenly with no warning. Of course, a big RAID would be expensive, too. -- Glenn English [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG ID: D0D7FF20 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
